i
Flood Reduction Plan A 20 Year Strategic Plan to Increase the Hydrologic Function & Resiliency of the Turkey River Watershed Developed for the TRWMA by Northeast Iowa RC&D Inc. with funding provided by HUD/CDBG
2 Table OF CONTENTS
Section ONE: Goals, Vision Statement & Objectives 1.A Goals 2 5.C Increase Rainwater Infiltration 55 1.B Vision statement 2 5.D Reduce Rainwater Runoff & Flash Flows 59 1.C Objectives 2 5.E Restore & Protect Stream Ecosystems 61 5.F Protect Properties Near Streams & Rivers 64 Section TWO: Watershed Characteristics & Demographics 5.G Implement SMART Planning Practices 65 2.A History of flooding & nutrient transport 4 5.H Education & Outreach 69 2.B Land ownership, use & major features 7 5.I Implement Policy 73 2.C Soils 15 5.J Document Results 74 2.D Climate & hydrology 20 2.E Geology of the watershed 21 Section SIX: Turkey River Watershed Budget 2.F Demographics 26 Objective 1: Food Mitigation Professionals 80 2.G Storm water runoff & smart planning 27 Objective 2: Implement Conservation Practices 80 2.H Existing public & private outreach organizations 31 Objective 3: Reduce Rainwater Runoff & Flash Flows 80 Objective 4: Restore & Protect Stream Ecosystems 81 Section THREE: Community Based Planning Objective 5: Protect Properties Near Streams & Rivers 81 3.A Local leadership Turkey River Watershed Management Authority 36 Objective 6: Implement SMART Planning Practices 81 3.B Public engagement 39 Objective 7: Education & Outreach 81 3.C Survey of residents 45 Total Plan Cost 82
Section FOUR: Watershed Research, Analysis & Monitoring Reference APPENDICES 4.A Rapid watershed assessment 48 Appendix 1 Additional Maps & Figures 4.B GIS analysis 49 Appendix 2 NRCS Rapid Watershed Assessment 4.C IIHR/Iowa flood center hydrologic analysis & modeling 49 Appendix 3 Hydrologic Assessment of the Turkey River Watershed Appendix 4 Introduction to Big Springs Section FIVE: Proposed Strategies Appendix 5 Outreach, Partnership & Engagement Plan 5.A Summary of Strategies 52 Appendix 6 TRW Survey of Residents 5.B Technical Assistance 53 Appendix 7 County Flood Management Structure Policy
ii iii
Definitions AND ACRONYMS
Turkey River
CDBG: Community Development Block Grant Program IDALS: Iowa Department of Agriculture & Land Stewardship Northeast Iowa RC&D: Northeast Iowa Resource Conser- CDI: Conservation Districts of Iowa IEDA: Iowa Economic Development Authority vation and Development CRP: Conservation Reserve Program IFC/IIHR: Iowa Flood Center NRCS RWA: Rapid Watershed Assessment DC: District Conservationist Iowa DNR: Iowa Department of Natural Resources SMART: Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, Timely EPA: Environmental Protection Agency IRVM: Integrated Roadside Vegetation Management SWCD: Soil and Water Conservation District EWP: Emergency Watershed Protection ISA: Iowa Soybean Association TRWMA: Turkey River Watershed Management Authority EWRP: Emergency Wetland Reserve Program MLRA: Major Land Resource Area TRW: Turkey River Watershed FEMA: Federal Emergency Management Agency NASS: National Agricultural Statistics Service USDA: United States Department of Agriculture GIS: Geographic Information System NRCS: Natural Resource Conservation Service USGS: United States Geological Survey HUC: Hydrologic Unit Code PFI: Practical Farmers of Iowa WRP: Wetlands Reserve Program IACAN: Iowa Conservation Action Network PF: Pheasants Forever
2 Partners AND RECOGNITION
Partner 1: Turkey River Watershed Management Authority (TRWMA) Member Cities, Counties, and SWCDs. TRWMA members each appointed one representative who served on the 35 member Turkey River WMA Board of Directors, meeting quarterly as a full Board and more frequently in committees to review information, develop recommendations, and finalize plan components.
Partner 2: Turkey River Watershed Management Authority Committees. Dozens of public and private partners served on TRWMA committees considering research, best management practices, economics, social factors and discussing local lessons learned. This plan is a direct reflection of their input and recommendations and would not have been possible without them. A full description of the committees is included in the Local Leadership section of this plan. The committees included; Executive, Techical, Community, Commissioners, County Infrastructure, Producer Groups, Education, Emergency Management, Fisheries, and RCPP.
Partner 3: Iowa Economic Development Authority. Administered HUD CDBG funding for the Turkey River WMA to develop this plan, including funding to contract professional facilitators, researchers and planners to help with development of this plan. They also administered HUD CDBG funding for the Iowa Flood Center and IIHR to model and test their models in the Turkey River Watershed and Otter Creek Watershed.
Partner 4: Clayton County. Clayton County Board of Supervisors served as the applicant for the IEDA funds. They and the Clayton County Auditor provided fiscal leadership and accounting for the IEDA and other grants on behalf of the TRWMA.
Partner 5: Iowa Flood Center. Provided state-of-the-art, in-depth analysis, research, and modeling that helped all the partners better understand the TRW and how specific actions could reduce flooding. They also provided equipment and monitoring throughout the TRW, and funding for specific projects in Otter Creek Watershed including five rain gauge/soil moisture probes, two stream gauging stations, and 3 real time nitrate monitors in Otter Creek Watershed. They have two additional nitrate monitors in the Turkey River and are partners in the placement and use of over 23 rain gauge/soil moisture probes throughout the TRW. They presented information to the TRWMA Board and committees regularly and maintain access to real-time, rainfall, soil moisture, river stage, and other monitoring online. They partnered with other TRW partners to secure funding for increased analysis, outreach, and monitoring. They expanded their assistance to work more in depth with specific TRW committees including the County Infrastructure Committee, Technical Committee, and Emergency Management Committee. They have partnered with the TRWMA and TRWMA partners to submit federal grants and secure funding for future work in the TRW.
Partner 6: Northeast Iowa RC&D. Northeast Iowa RC&D helped the TRWMA form and secured planning, research project, and outreach grants. As the contracted planning entity they provided planning, facilitation, research, grant writing, GIS analysis, design, marketing, and communication, as well as outreach and education at the local and state level to the TRWMA Board and partners. In addition, as a partnering organization, the RC&D provided grant writing assistance, coordinated and funded watershed wide water quality monitoring and analysis, partner and pubic outreach and education, and developed and maintained public communications and information distribution through the www. turkeyriver.org website. They funded and placed rain gauges and soil moisture probes throughout the TRW. They secured funding from several private and public grantors for complementary work in the watershed including a Rapid Land Cover Analysis of the TRW and a conservation outreach and marketing campaign.
iv v
Partner 7: Iowa Natural Resources Conservation Service. Completed a rapid watershed assessment of the TRW, assisted with project design and implementation in Otter Creek (Iowa Flood Center Phase II Project), delivered educational presentations to the TRWMA Board and served on committees during the planning process.
Partner 8: Iowa Department of Natural Resources. Iowa DNR staff assisted with collection of water samples from throughout the TRW and assisted with funding for analysis of those samples. The water monitoring and analysis provided baseline data for the project in terms of water quality and nutrient and soil transport. They also provided technical assistance and input throughout the planning process by serving on committees including the Technical Committee and the Fisheries Committee, by providing technical assistance to the planning staff and TRWMA members as needed, and providing information for use in GIS analysis. The Big Spring Report completed by the Iowa Geological Survey Bureau was used for background information regarding the TRW geology, karst features, and provided a better understanding of springsheds. IADNR also provided an additional planning grant to the TRWMA to add nutrient reduction strategies to this plan, which is scheduled to be completed by December 2015.
Partner 9: McKnight Foundation. Provided funding for water quality monitoring in the TRW, GIS analysis, development of the TRW website and technical assistance to the TRW Alliance, more recent funding to engage landowners through tile outlet monitoring, and rain gauge/soil moisture/temperature probes to be installed throughout the TRW. Monitoring and gauging provided a baseline of water quality information and extensive tools for producers and residents of the TRW to participate in project research and promotion..
Partner 10: United State Geological Survey Bureau. USGS river gauges in the TRW helped the partners better understand the hydrology of the watershed and aided in modeling.
Partner 11: County Farm Bureau Chapters in the TRW. Iowa Farm Bureau County Boards in the Turkey River Watershed provided input for the planning process, time for presentations and discussion at their meetings, and encouraged members to attend public planning meetings. Three counties, Winneshiek, Howard and Chickasaw, also, with assistance from the Regional 6 Manager, submitted and secured state grants for Rain Gauge Monitors and Soil Moisture Probes that will be used to help producers better understand the hydrology of the watershed and how it relates to soil moisture and rainfall. The Iowa Farm Bureau Federation Region 6 Manager. The Region 6 Manager also assisted with producer outreach and served on the Producer Group Committee, providing additional input and guidance.
Partner 12: Iowa Soybean Association. ISA assisted with producer outreach and education, on-farm conservation planning through the Iowa Conservation Action Network, and on-farm tile-line monitoring. They met with producers and with other producer groups to provide input and make recommendations. An ISA staff member served on the Producer Group Committee providing input and guidance for the project. ISA was also a partner organization on a grant submitted to the McKnight Foundation by Northeast Iowa RC&D. The ISA agreed to provide assistance with tile-line monitoring and outreach components for the proposal.
Partner 13: Iowa Corn Growers Association. Assisted with producer outreach and education as well as on farm planning through the Iowa Conservation Action Network. They met with producers and with other producer groups to provide input and make recommendations. A representative also served on the Producer Group Committee providing input and guidance.
2 Section ONE Goals, Vision Statement & Objectives
1 2
Goals, Vision Statement, & Objectives SECTION ONE A, B & C
1.A Goals: The Goal of this twenty-year plan is to increase the hydrologic function and resiliency of the Turkey River Watershed (TRW) so as to measurably reduce peak discharge in the Turkey River Watershed by 10% near the mouth of the river at Garber, Iowa during a 5.5 inch rainfall across the entire watershed. The partners recognize that a 5.5 inch rainfall across the entire watershed in twenty-four hours is unlikely to occur and that irregular rainfall is a truer representation of actual rainfall patterns, but have used this scenario as a standard that can be modeled by partners, specifically the Iowa Flood Center and IIHR. The reduction in peak discharge, which will only be accomplished through a complex system of actions taken by a diverse group of partners, will save millions of dollars in damage to public and private infrastructure throughout the Turkey River Watershed (TRW). It is dependent on watershed-wide implementation of flow reduction practices that result in a reduction in storm water discharge of between 20% and 40% from any given tributary to the Turkey River. The Turkey River Watershed Management Authority (TRWMA) believes that the conservation work and best management practices that will be utilized to reach this goal will have a multitude of other benefits, including helping the TRW be more resilient during episodes of low rainfall that would otherwise lead to extreme drought conditions, improving water quality in TRW streams and the river, and creating and diversifying wildlife habitat throughout the TRW.
1.B Vision statement: The Vision of the TRWMA is that the TRW will be a high functioning hydrologic system that has increased resiliency in the face of changing precipitation patterns. Increased landscape resiliency will be achieved through the efforts of many partners working independently and collectively to increase the capacity of the watershed to slow and hold water for longer periods of time during heavy precipitation events, and consistently increase groundwater infiltration throughout the watershed to reduce drought during extended periods of decreased rainfall. Benchmarks can and will be quantitatively measured through analysis of data from gauging stations throughout the TRW and other research and monitoring detailed in this plan.
1.C Objectives: Plan objectives are as follows: Objective 1: Develop a team of flood mitigation professionals. Objective 2: Implement conservation practices that stop or slow rainwater where it falls or increase rainwater infiltration so that stormwater runoff is reduced. Objective 3: Slow down rainwater runoff and reduce the frequency and intensity of heavy flash flows into streams and rivers, thereby protecting aquatic and riparian habitat, streambanks, stream and river substrate, conservation practices, and private and public infrastructure. Objective 4: Restore and protect streams, the river, and near stream ecosystems to increase their capacity, hold storm water runoff, increase stability/resiliency during rainfall/runoff events. Objective 5: Permanently protect and/or enhance highly sensitive, priority properties adjacent to and near streams and rivers to increase the floodplain capacity. Objective 6: Work with TRW Communities to implement SMART Planning practices (Specific, Mearurable, Achievable, Realistic Informed, Timely Planning practices). Objective 7: Use existing and new education and outreach methods to engage producers and community members in all aspects of flood protection. Objective 8: Work with TRWMA members and partners to develop and implement policy that supports a hydrologically resilient TRW: i.e. policies that help decrease stormwater runoff, lower peak flows during heavy rainfall events, and develop a landscape that is more resistant to drought. Objective 9: Quantitatively document the hydrological, water quality, social, and policy impacts and changes that result from the implementation of this plan.
2 Section TWO Watershed Characteristics & Demographics
3 4
History of Flooding & Nutrient Transport SECTION TWO A
Fayette County Bridge Destroyed in Flood Event Fayette County Bridge Damaged in Flood Event Volga Bridge Washed Away in Flood Event
2.A History of flooding & nutrient transport: In 2015, a poll was conducted to summarize the In 1999, the community of Volga lost 36 houses to a FEMA Flooding and water quality issues in the TRW have been flood damage inflicted on the TRW counties and buyout, which covered 20 acres. The majority of these homes documented by local, state, and federal public and communities for the twenty years prior to 2015. were historic structures. All of the businesses in the main private entities and have been directly experienced by Three communities reported no flood damage. downtown district (Washington Street) were impacted. Roads TRW residents, businesses, and communities. Flooding Six communities and one county reported a and sidewalks were damaged. The town’s only grocery store, has devastated several communities in the TRW. Those total of $20.7 million damages, 105 homes lost, restaurant, and bar never reopened. The flooding so severely most impacted by flooding have been those along 79 businesses damaged or lost, and 1,518 road impacted the community that the downtown district was the Turkey River in Clayton County but communities segments, bridges, or culverts damaged or declared a blighted area because many businesses remained along the Volga River, which is a major tributary to the destroyed. These figures represent only a fraction damaged and vacant years after the flooding occurred. The Turkey River, have also been impacted, as have river of the actual cost given that only one county, one dike system along the Turkey River had to be rebuilt, sewer and communities in Fayette and Chickasaw counties. Several fourth of the TRW communities reported and no water lines repaired or replaced, and city property was washed federal disasters have been declared in the watershed agricultural loss was reported. These numbers also away. Although the FEMA buyout helped, creating green counties but the flood of 2008 was especially destructive. do not include the millions of dollars in federal space, the resulting reduction of the property tax base due to County engineers also report flood damage to roads FEMA funding spent on property buyouts or residents relocating crippled the town’s ability to repair public and bridges throughout the watershed. recovery. infrastructure or move forward with community projects.
2 SECTION TWO A
Photo Courtesy Clayton County Register
Photo Courtesy www.garberiowa.com
Elkader, Iowa Flood of 2008 Garber, Iowa Flood of 2008 County Road Infrastructure Damage
The TRW community of Elkader experienced severe Turkey River flooding has devastated several Flood damage to county infrastructure including flooding in 2008. The community spent millions of dollars in Clayton County communities, including roads, bridges, and culverts has occurred local, state, and federal funding to deal with damages. $1.8 Littleport, Elkport, and Garber, which did not throughout the watershed. Clayton and Fayette million was invested to repair flood damaged community have the private capital to rebuild. In some County have documented the most loss and most infrastructure, including water and sewer lines under the cases, last minute warnings about the rising severe damage to bridges and miles of road river and the sewer lift station; $1.2 million was spent to river upstream gave residents just enough time infrastructure. During one flood event in 2008, replace the flood destroyed fire station; $2.2 million to to evacuate their homes. They left everything Fayette County resorted to removing a road that buy-out flooded properties (not including redevelopment behind, planning to return in the morning. was acting as a levee in an effort to save the costs). The cost to private businesses and homeowners in When they returned to Littleport, the entire community of Elgin. In 2014, storm water runoff historic Elkader, where the town’s only grocery store and town was under water with the Volga River, a from one event impacted five hundred and thirty twenty-seven other businesses were severely damaged or tributary to the Turkey River, raging through road segments and closed fifty-four sections of destroyed, was estimated at another $2 million. Flooding the town. Eventually, the river receded and secondary roads in Fayette County. This not only impacted the community again in 2014 causing another residents returned, but the sediment laden caused extensive infrastructure damage to both $200,000 in damage to community infrastructure, for river water had filled most of the homes in the secondary and primary roads, but also severely which the city could obtain no assistance from FEMA. town with ten feet of mud. impacted travel in that county for several days.
5 6
Sediment Laden Turkey River Below Elkader Water Monitoring in the TRW West Union Urban Conservation Practices
According to the Iowa Department of Water monitoring conducted over a three-year According to the Iowa Source Water Protection Natural Resources, water quality monitoring period by the TRW Alliance documents high levels Program, three communities in the Turkey River conducted in seven eastern Iowa rivers during of sediment and nutrients in TRW surface waters. Watershed, Elgin, Strawberry Point , and West Union, 2008 floods revealed the TRW contributed Water samples were gathered from over fifty are on the IADNR Priority Source Water Protection the highest nitrogen and sediment yield per sites in the watershed including at the mouth of list and there are additional communities that are square mile of watershed to the Mississippi each tributary and in the Turkey River itself. The considered to have highly susceptible community River of all seven rivers. The study compared samples were collected during a nine-hour span on water systems due to high nitrate levels. Although the Turkey River and its watershed to the the same day each month by professional partners two of these communities have implemented urban Maquoketa, Cedar, Iowa, Wapsipinicon, from throughout the watershed. They were then conservation practices, both may have to consider Skunk and Des Moines rivers and their sent to the State Hygienic Lab for analysis. The working with rural landowners that control land in their watersheds. Another Iowa Department of lab analyzed the water for concentrations of well capture zones. Priority Source Water Protection Natural Resources study of seventy-six Iowa Ammonia, Nitrogen as N, E.Coli Bacteria, and systems have highly susceptible aquifers with finished streams found that the Turkey River was the Total Phosphate as P. Data collection at the site water N Levels above 5 mg/L. (Susceptibility is based fourth highest contributor of sediment to also included water temperature, pH, Dissolved on the geologic characteristics of the aquifer and is the Mississippi River during normal flow. Oxygen, Transparency, and Chloride. independent of well vulnerability).
2 Land Ownership, Use & Major Features SECTION TWO B
2.B Land Ownership, Use, & Major Features: abundant. Valleys commonly take abrupt, sharp-angled season because of climate limitations. Corn and soybeans, The 1,083,520-acre TRW is a very rural watershed, with turns, indicating the local drainage network is controlled the most commonly grown crops, are typically planted no large municipality. The watershed land area extends by joint patterns in the underlying bedrock.” in May-June and harvested in October-November. Some into portions of eight counties, comprising between 24% corn acres are harvested in late August and September for and 70% of five of those counties. Clayton and Fayette The land use in MLRA 104 was historically dominated by silage. A majority of row crop agriculture producers use counties are dominated by the TRW with seventy percent wetlands and tallgrass prairie, but is now predominantly conventional tillage prior to planting. Although all county and sixty-nine percent of their county land areas included row crop agriculture with a light mix of pasture, timber, Soil and Water Conservation Districts (SWCDs) in the TRW in the TRW respectively (Figure 2.B.1). The vast majority and grassland. Tiling in this portion of the watershed has report use of no till practices in their counties, the total of the land in the TRW, 91%, is privately owned; 3.8% of been extensively used to increase crop suitability and to number of acres varies annually and there is currently no the watershed is owned by county, state, or federal public maximize productivity. MLRA 105 has a higher frequency estimate of total no till acres in the TRW. Since corn and entities, railroads, and unincorporated areas. of sinkholes, sharp gullies and valleys, steep, highly erodible soybeans are planted in May-June, conventionally tilled hillsides, and cold water streams. There are also fewer fields are most vulnerable to runoff and erosion directly Approximately 2.6% of the land area in the TRW is within naturally occurring wetlands, a higher percentage of trees, before and after planting before crops have become the boundaries of forty small communities (Figure 2.B.2). tiling is less common, shallow soils over fractured bedrock established. This intense tillage and planting period According to NRCS, the Turkey River Watershed is are more prominent and there is more natural drainage. coincides with the months that have the highest mean included in two Major Land Resource Areas (MLRA), 104 average of precipitation for the year, typically May and and 105. A MLRA is defined by NRCS as “an area of land There are an estimated 3,404 active farms in this watershed, June. Land use in the TRW, calculated from NASS Cropland that has similar dominant physical characteristics including which utilize over 52% of the watershed acres for cropping. Data layer at a thirty meter resolution is provided in more physiography, geology, climate, water, soils, biological Based on the 2012 US Census of Agriculture total crop detail in Figure 2.B.3. resources, and land use.” NRCS describes MLRA 104, acres per county, the majority of the crop acre in the TRW which encompasses the western portion of the TRW as, are in annual row crops of corn and soybeans. Typically According to the TRW Assessment conducted by Iowa “covered with glacial till and outwash deposits.” NRCS these crops are grown in a set rotation of corn-beans or NRCS (RWA) in March 2012, in addition to the cropland, notes MLRA 105 has undergone only limited landscape corn-corn-beans. The data from the 2012 US Census of 27.3% of the watershed is in pasture or hayland, 14.4% formation by glacial ice. In their description of this MLRA Agriculture also details ownership and other cropping is in woodland or natural areas, 5.3% is developed urban they note, “The area consists mostly of gently sloping characteristics, including that a majority of farmland with land use, 0.2% is water and 0.5 percent is in wetlands. to rolling summits with steep valley walls that join small harvested crop was cropped and harvested by the land The majority of the pasture and hay/meadow acres to very large flood plains. Deep valleys, abundant rock owner or partial owner of the land. Most of the farmed recorded by NRCS are found in the eastern half of the outcrops, high bluffs, caves, crevices and sinkholes are land in the TRW grows only one crop for harvest per watershed, which has traditionally been a holdout for
7 8
by C Figure 2.B.1 Turkey River Watershed: Land Area ounty
2 SECTION TWO B
es Figure 2.B.2 Turkey River Watershed: Communiti
9 10
Figure 2.B.3 Turkey River Watershed: Land Use
2 SECTION TWO B
dairy and cattle producers. However, as commodity in the watershed over the past decade. The Converted from Grassland, Wetland and Shrubland crop prices have increased and dairy and beef prices conversion of acres of grassland/wetland/shrubland Converted (2008-2011) developed by the Iowa have fluctuated, more acres, including some of the between 2008 and 2011 in the two dominant TRW Environmental Working Group. The increase in corn steep slopes, that were historically converted from counties, Fayette and Clayton, was at some of the acres in the watershed is illustrated in a map of Corn woodland to pasture and hay, have been converted highest levels of any county in Iowa. This conversion Production Increases in Iowa, Change in Corn Acres to row crop, creating a significant shift in percentage can been seen in relation to the conversion of acres by County in Iowa 2000-2010, found in Appendix 1: acres of hay/meadow to soybean and corn production in other Iowa counties in the Figure 2.B.4, Acres Additional Maps, Figures and Charts.
SWCD offices in the TRW report increased interest in, and use of, cover crops. Clayton County SWCD reports an increase in cover crop acres from 1,500 acres in 2012 to 5,500 acres in 2013. This management trend mirrors the use of cover crops in Iowa, which, according to Practical Farmers of Iowa (PFI), saw a huge statewide increase in total acres of cover crops, from less than 10,000 acres in 2009 to as many as 300,000 acres in 2013. PFI reports on their website,. “In the 2012 Census Iowa farmers planted 379,614 acres of cover crops. Considering that the timing of the Census of Ag survey reached Iowa farmers prior to the most recent cost share program from the Iowa Department of Ag and Land Stewardship it’s safe to estimate that total cover crops planted during the fall of 2013-2014 was closer to 450,000 acres in Iowa.” Cover crops planted in the TRW include small grains, legumes, brassicas, and other plants that are planted between cash crop seasons to and Shrubland (2 erted from Grassland, Wetlands 008-2011) (Map by IEWG) keep a living cover on the landscape. Several studies Figure 2.B.4 Acres Conv have shown these plants improve soil health, build
11 12
topsoil, increase infiltration, protect soil, and improve water quality. According to PFI, they have also been shown to reduce chemical input costs, improve farm resiliency, boost yields, increase forage availability, and improve wildlife habitat.
Although woodlands and natural area acres cover 14.4% of the TRW, similar to the hay/meadow acres, the woodland acres are more prevalent in the eastern third of the watershed where there is a higher concentration of highly erodible lands (D and E slopes) with fragile forest formed soils. Northeast Iowa, including eastern portions of the TRW, is known for its hardwood tree production, particularly walnut trees, which are considered by many buyers as being of the highest quality in the world. The high prices these trees command have historically encouraged both tree harvest and planting. Direct seeding, a popular planting method that spreads a diverse mix of nuts across the field, and tree seedling planting, have been used by landowners in isolated instances throughout the watershed for over twenty years. The majority of the mature woodland acres are incorporated into the landscape at strategic positions, historically influenced by soils, depth to bedrock, slope, and other topographic and landscape factors. Common woodland landscape positions in the TRW include riparian areas, steep hillsides and gullys, and areas with in the Turkey River Watershed Common Forest Landscape poor soil and/or shallow depth to bedrock.
2 SECTION TWO B
The RWA found that trees in the bottomland floodplains of The TRW has three of the most effective Pheasants than 66 feet. These acres constitute significant public the TRW “are being severely impacted from scour erosion, Forever (PF) chapters in the United States. Clayton, land holdings for a limited number of land managers, i.e. river meandering, and extreme sand and silt depositions Fayette, and Winneshiek county PF chapters consistently the TRW county engineers/roadside managers. The TRW from frequent flooding (probably ranging from 3 to 6 year rank among the top ten and frequently in the top five has diverse native and restored plant communities in intervals between floods that are so severe they could chapters in the nation for habitat development. These PF many of these public roadsides, which are documented almost be called, “stand replacing disturbances”).” chapters have partnered with dedicated producers, local to have water retention and erosion control benefits. SWCDs, and USDA to enroll tens of thousands of highly Fayette County has the oldest and one of the most active The RWA noted that, as flooding has devastated cropland erodible cropland acres into the Conservation Reserve Integrated Roadside Vegetation Management (IRVM) and riparian areas, producers have worked with USDA/NRCS Program over the past two decades. In recent years, a programs in the nation. and is know for its use of deep- to take cropland out of production. The NRCS Watershed high percentage of CRP acres have been native grass rooted, native plants. The Fayette County GIS Manager, Assessment identified 41 USDA/NRCS conservation and/or forb plantings, varying in diversity from a limited Joe Biver, estimates that in the Fayette County portion easements totaling 2,460 acres including Emergency number of native grasses to diverse pollinator mixes. of the TRW 3,800 acres of county right of way under the Watershed Protection (EWP) program, Wetlands Reserve When commodity crop prices have spiked, some CRP jurisdiction of Fayette County increasing the county’s Program (WRP), and Emergency Wetlands Reserve acres have been converted back to row crop in the TRW. related infiltration and flood control. Program (EWRP). They also noted that easement acres However, in 2014 the trend reversed and Clayton, Fayette, are divided across the watershed as follows: 54% of the and Winneshiek county PF chapters ranked 4th, 5th, and County roads in the TRW intersect with 1,638 natural flow easements acres are in Fayette County, 36% in Clayton 6th in the nation for 2014 habitat restoration, the majority paths, requiring county engineers to plan and manage County, 6% in Howard County, 3.1% in Winneshiek County, of which were CRP acres. for surface water and storm water runoff throughout and the remaining 0.9% in Chickasaw County. the watershed. Although Figure 2.B.5 Stream Intersection The majority of public roadsides in the TRW are managed Points with County Roads Map illustrates the relationship Local resource professionals report a need for, and producers by county government, specifically county engineers of county roads to natural flow paths, the intersection of have expressed interest in, additional enrollments in these and their staff. There are 2,729 miles of county roads roads and flow paths does not necessarily indicate the programs. Unfortunately, local natural resource professionals in the TRW and 178 miles of roads located within TRW exact locations of culverts, bridges, or other structures. report that USDA/NRCS program funding allocations and communities. The county gravel roads have varying Some County Engineers have paper documentation timing for these programs have limited landowner participation widths of right of way of 66 feet, 33 feet from center of location and size of culvert and bridges and some in the TRW. The specific location of the easements in the TRW of road to edge of right of way per side being the most have begun digitizing this information. However, there is can be seen in the Iowa Rapid Watershed Assessment Turkey common. Paved county roads, in general, have wider currently no digital database for the TRW that details this River - NRCS Conservation Easement Map. right of way, ranging from 80-100 feet (or greater) rather specific information.
13 14
ounty Roads M Figure 2.B.5 Stream Intersection Points with C ap
2 Soils SECTION TWO C
Iowa NRCS State Soils Scientist, Rick Bednarek presented to the TRWMA Board about the importance of soil quality and organic matter noting that whereas poor quality, compacted soils can hold a minimum amount of rainfall, healthy soils act as a sponge. He explained that, “The more organic matter in the soil, the more water holding capacity you have in the soil and in the watershed. Healthy soils may hold 16,000 and 20,000 gallons/acre per percent of organic matter. Infiltration is another soil characteristic that can be improved with organic matter and other factors. Soil quality refers to the inherent qualities of the soils, whereas, soil health is related to the more dynamic properties of the soil that change due to management including microbiology, organic matter etc.”
He also noted that the plow pan, which can be from 6-7 inches in depth, is a compacted layer that forms from soil disturbance. The plow pan restricts oil health can r er, reducing tillage & improving s educe infiltration & runoff water movement into the soil and increases runoff. Increasing organic matt Decreased disturbance and the resulting increased soil health can break down the plow pan and increase 2.C Soils: Soils are an important component of the artificial drainage has impacted drainage characteristics infiltration. Bednarek stated, “The use of cover crops TRW that must be considered in watershed planning and and are themselves influenced by soil type, which helps break up the plow pan at a faster rate than the hydrologic considerations. The landscape position and vary greatly across the 1,080,000 acre TRW. Soil type, use of no-till alone.” He also recommended the use of parent materials in which soils are formed are among organic matter, and soil health, which is tied to all the the principles of soil health as detailed in the USDA/ several factors that impact soils type and drainage aforementioned and other factors, also greatly impact NRCS national campaign for soil health including the characteristics in the TRW. Land use and the use of water holding capacity, infiltration, and runoff. following:
15 16
1. The physical properties of the soil, including bulk 2. Residue year round - Year round residue will 3. Little or no disturbance - No Till or strip till increase density, infiltration, soil structure and macropores, soil decrease the direct impact of the raindrop USDA/ infiltration, help build organic matter levels, increase depth, and water holding capacity influence retention NRCS provides guidelines for soil health assessment pore space, and help aggregate stability. Conversely and transport of water and nutrients; habitat for soil in a publication “Guidelines for Soil Quality when fields are tilled the microbial balance is decreased microbes; estimate of crop productivity potential; Assessment in Conservation Planning”, which also as is organic matter and pore space. Moving the soil compaction, plow pan, water movement; porosity; provides the following indicator examples and breaks down the aggregate stability. This seems counter and workability. relationship to soil health. intuitive to some producers who think that if they plow and disturb the soil it will make the field more absorbent but that is not the case.
4. Chemical properties such as electrical conductivity, reactive carbon, soil nitrate, oil pH, and extractable phosphorus and potassium influence biological and chemical activity thresholds; plant and microbial activity thresholds; and plant available nutrients and potential for nitrogen and phosphorous loss.
5. Biological factors such as earthworms, microbial biomass carbon and nitrogen, particulate organic matter, potentially mineralizable N, soil enzymes, soil respiration, and total organic carbon influence microbial catalytic potential and repository for carbon and nitrogen; soil productivity and nitrogen supplying potential; and microbial activity measure.
6. Living roots year round - Living roots are the most active Healthy soil source in the soil for microbes, where they get their food, making them an important component of healthy soils.
2 SECTION TWO C
7. Diverse Crop Rotation and/or Cover Crops - Corn and soybeans rotations are not diverse in their own right. However, cover crop mixtures can help producers add 6-8 or more species/cover crop, providing food for microbes year round and protection for the living armor of the soil. Cover Crops should be left to decompose so they can be most effective rather than plowed up before planting of the commodity crop.
8. Soil organic matter influences nutrient retention; soil fertility; soil structure; soil stability and decreased soil erosion.
These relationships and indicators provide general information regarding the potential for soil infiltration and water holding capacity in the TRW. NRCS’s publication “Guidelines for Soil Quality Assessment in Conservation Planning” goes on to detail the inherent quality and dynamic qualities of soil providing insight into the relevance of soil quality and health to planning in the TRW. They note the following.
Soils vary naturally in their capacity to function, therefore, quality is specific to each kind of soil. This concept encompasses two distinct but interconnected parts: inherent quality and dynamic quality. Characteristics, d and protection for t such as texture, mineralogy, etc., are innate soil e food for microbes year roun he living armor of the soil Cover crops can provid properties determined by the factors of soil formation:
17 18
climate, topography, vegetation, parent material, and time. In the TRW, loams and silt loams dominate the uplands. the watershed, are commonly in the Fayette series. Collectively, these properties determine the inherent Loamy soils in the upstream portions of the watershed, Generally speaking, the loams and silt loams derived quality of a soil. They help compare one soil to another which formed in shallow till, include Kenyon, Riceville, from variable materials dominate throughout the and evaluate soils for specific uses. For example, all else and Racine Series whereas soils near the mouth of the Turkey River Valley. The Fayette series consists of being equal, a loamy soil will have a higher water holding watershed, in Clayton County, contain silt loams of the very deep, well drained soils and slopes range from capacity than a sandy soil; thus, the loamy soil has a higher Fayette, Downs, and Tama Series. The upstream soils 0-60%. inherent soil quality. This concept is generally referred to as are typically tiled and in row crop production. The three soil capability. Map unit descriptions in soil survey reports downstream soil series were formed in loess, are well- In upstream portions of the watershed (Howard, are based on differences in the inherent properties of soils. drained and, although tiling on these slopes is becoming Winneshiek, and Fayette counties) soils of the Colo, The publication goes on to note the influence that human more common, they are less likely to be tiled than the Spillville, and Caneek Series are common in the stream use and management can have on soil quality. upstream soils. Additional information on soils and their valleys, floodplains, upstream drainageways and nearly influence on land use and hydrology follows. level gently sloping footslopes. Slopes for Colo Series More recently, soil quality has come to refer to the dynamic range from 0-5 % and the soils are very deep, poorly quality of soils, defined as the changing nature of soil According to the NRCS Soil Survey, silt loam soils drained and formed in alluvium. The Spillville Series properties resulting from human use and management. Some are common on the lower slopes but vary depending range from 0-5% and vary from moderately well management practices, such as the use of cover crops, increase on the parent material. The silt loam soils on the drained to somewhat poorly drained soils. The Caneek organic matter and can have a positive effect on soil quality. lower slopes in the Winneshiek County portion of Series is very deep, somewhat poorly drained and Other management practices, such as tilling the soil when wet, the watershed include the Marlean and Nordness poorly drained soils will 0-2 % slopes. adversely affect soil quality by increasing compaction. Series, which were formed in shallow to bedrock conditions. These soils are generally well drained In downstream portions of the watershed (primarily Although, there have not been any widespread studies soils with slopes ranging from 2 to as high as 80 % Clayton County) soils from the Dorchester Series are of soil health in the TRW, it is assumed that an unknown for Marlean and 2-40 % for Nordness. However, the more common. They have slopes ranging from 0-5 % percentage of individual producers in the watershed silt loam soils found in Howard County portion of the and are very deep, well drained and moderately well understand the importance of soil health, monitor soil watershed are form ed in shallow to till conditions drained soils found on narrow flood plains of small health, and incorporate practices that improve soil health and are in the Floyd Series. The Floyd Series consists streams that have limestone bluffs and outcroppings into their operation. Basic information about the TRW soils, of very deep, somewhat poorly drained soils with nearby. Caneek Series, which is somewhat poorly to their drainage and water holding capacity is included in slopes ranging from 0-5 % The soils formed in loess poorly drained are also found in the valleys located in Figure 2C-1. found in the Fayette and Clayton county portions of the downstream portions of the watershed.
2 SECTION TWO C
Figure 2C-1 Silt loam soils
19 20
Climate and Hydrology SECTION TWO D
accumulated winter snow, and low evaporation before the growing season begins: these factors combine to produce high springtime streamflows.” In regard to flood climatology, the Iowa Flood Center’s Hydrologic Assessment of the Turkey River Watershed noted that in the TRW, the “annual maximum flows occur in March or April but the largest single annual maximums occurred in May and June.”
Even more relevant to flood prevention and planning, IFC notes that, “Annual mean precipitation levels are relatively unchanged in the Midwest US yet rainfall events are less frequent but of higher intensity in recent years.” If these trends continue, it will increase the frequency flash and large scale floods. It may also influence incidence of drought.
d C Turkey River at Garber - © Iowa Floo enter Personnel from the IFC note that these rainfall patterns may also increase the likelihood of severe and extended periods of drought. The same 2.D Climate and hydrology: According the monthly water cycle and rainfall characteristics strategies recommended in this plan will make the to the NRCS Watershed Assessment, the annual of the TRW in their Hydrologic Assessment of the TRW landscape more resistent to drought. precipitation in this watershed is between 29-37 Turkey River Watershed. They identified the month and 30-38 inches respectively, with most of the of June as have the highest average monthly Additional information regarding the hydrology of rainfall occurring as high-intensity, convective estimate for precipitation between 1981 and 2010. the TRW can be found in the Iowa Flood Center’s thunderstorms during the summer months. The They also noted that in the TRW, “Spring is marked Hydrologic Assessment of the Turkey River Iowa Flood Center/IIHR looked more closely at by an increase in precipitation, the melting of any Watershed attached to this plan in Appendix 4.
2 Geology of the Watershed SECTION TWO E
consists mainly of Devonian dolomite and limestone. Chickasaw and Winneshiek counties are underlain by Devonian dolomite and limestone, and Ordovician shale and dolomite. Fayette County bedrock consists of Devonian dolomite and limestone, Silurian limestone, and Ordovician shale and dolomite. Clayton County bedrock consists primarily of Silurian limestone and Ordovician shale and dolomite.
The landscape of the TRW area falls primarily within two of Iowa’s seven landform regions, which are closely aligned with the NRCS MLRAs mentioned under the land use section of this plan. Elevations from the head to the mouth of the watershed range from about 1,330 feet to 605 feet. Although the average watershed slope is 6.6%, the slope varies greatly depending on the land surface and location within the watershed.
nd Trout Stream in TRW - Otter Creek The western portions of the watershed are in the Iowan Limestone Outcropping a Erosion Surface including portions within Howard, Chickasaw, western Winneshiek, and Fayette counties. 2.E Geology of the Watershed: The geology bedrock of the TRW noting the following. The soils The associated topography is described as nearly level of the TRW influences the topography, soil type, land use, and landforms of the TRW formed in isolated deposits topography, generally open, or gently rolling. According and hydrology of the watershed, making it an important of glacial drift laid down by ice and water over the last to the NWA, this area was “developed on Pre-Illinoian factor in watershed planning. It also creates opportunities two million years during the Pleistocene and Holocene till as a result of the intense periglacial conditions and for flood reduction and water quality improvement that Epochs. Beneath the unconsolidated deposits is Paleozoic strong winds associated with the Late Wisconsinan glacial other watersheds may not have. The NRCS Watershed bedrock, which becomes generally older from northeast advance that formed the Des Moines Lobe to the west. In Assessment describes the geologic formations and to southwest. In Howard County, underlying bedrock many places, the erosion left behind a lag deposit called
21 22
a “stone line,” which is covered by loamy sediments outcroppings, affect land management and cropping these species are in-stream and near-stream species of variable thickness. Loess mantles the till on isolated system decisions (Figure 2.E.3 Sinkholes, Cold Water Trout that are severely impacted during their life cycle or topographic highs that survived the widespread erosion.” Streams and Depth to Bedrock). This creates a need for reproductive cycle by the flashy stream flows, stream Given the topography and the clay-dominated soils, more deliberate use of conservation practices including down cutting, and increased stream bank instability obstruction of water flow in this portion of the watershed terraces, no-till, waterways, and cover crops that help hold associated with flooding. can back up water onto many acres. the soil and nutrients in place. Underground karst features influence the hydrology, changing the way surface water One of the most prominent karst features found in The eastern portion of the watershed is within the moves through the system and the speed with which Iowa, the largest spring in the State, Big Spring, is found Paleozoic Plateau, including southern portions of it moves. Sinkholes and losing streams provide direct in the TRW adjacent to the Turkey River in Clayton Winneshiek County, eastern Fayette, and all of Clayton conduits for surface water into an extensive underground County. Big Spring Hatchery, an Iowa DNR facility that County. The soluable limestone bedrock in the eastern system of actively eroding fissures and caves that move provides stocked rainbow, brown, and brook trout for portion of the watershed is closer to the surface and water quickly under traditional topographic watershed cold water trout streams, is located near this spring. has a dominating influence on the resulting terrain boundaries to coldwater springs and streams miles away. The facility has suffered major damage due to flooding known as karst topography. Karst topography is These coldwater springs feed 22 Iowa DNR designated on several occasions. Because of its significance to defined as a landscape formed from the dissolution coldwater streams within the TRW. Coldwater streams the State of Iowa and the region, Big Spring and its of soluble rocks. Over time rivers have cut down into are not common in Iowa, as they are primarily found the limestone creating valleys with steep hillslopes. The in karst watersheds in Northeast Iowa. The coldwater underlying soluble limestone bedrock also has well streams and other warm water tributaries in the TRW developed fissures and cracks, many of which have are severely impacted by flooding. A Rapid Watershed dissolved and/or collapsed to leave sinkholes and cave Assessment of the TRW conducted by Iowa NRCS systems that move water quickly through the system noted,“The change in hydrology due to stream channel to emerge miles away in springs. straightening, subsurface drainage systems, wetland destruction, and lack of perennial groundcover has Because the TRW is an active karst system, dissolution resulted in flashy stream flows, thus contributing of the limestone continues to influence and alter the to stream down cutting and increased stream bank hydrology of the watershed and the dynamics of land use. instability.” The TRW streams provide significant aquatic Karst surface features, including steep highly erodible and terrestrial habitat that is important to endangered In-Stream Sinkhole hills, sinkholes, springs, losing streams, and limestone and listed aquatic and terrestrial species. Many of
2 SECTION TWO E
‘springshed’ was the focus of extensive dye tracing and water quality studies over several decades (Appendix 4). The study documented the transport of surface water from sinkholes and losing streams miles underground to the spring within hours. Dye tracing revealed that the basin feeding Big Spring does not follow surficial watershed boundaries but actually crosses the boundaries of six different HUC 12 and two different HUC 8 surficial watersheds. Surficial and groundwater basin boundaries match where valleys follow joint trends in the underlying bedrock. Water passes into the Big Spring underground basin through sinkholes, caves, and fissures vertically before moving horizontally along arterial conduits through a layer of Galena carbonate from north to south until emerging to the surface at Big Spring.
Big Spring is merely one example of thousands of springs in the Driftless Region of Iowa. In some parts of the TRW, much of the surface drainage actually ends up underground for a period of time before emerging again through springs. The study of the Big Spring watershed tells us the land area draining to the TRW is actually larger than formerly realized because of underground basins crossing HUC 8 boundaries (Figure 2.E.3. HUC 12 Watersheds in the TRW and Big Spring Springshed). Further study of springsheds is necessary to understand the full hydrologic Figure 2.E.1 How Karst Systems Work impact of karst features on flooding and runoff.
23 24
eams and Depth to Bedrock Figure 2.E.2 Sinkholes, Coldwater Trout Str
2 SECTION TWO E
and Big Spring Springshed Figure 2.E.3: HUC 12 Watersheds in the TRW
25 26
Demographics SECTION TWO F
2.F Demographics: The TRW is a very rural Although the NRCS estimate of population in the TRW unemployment and lower median income levels than watershed, populated by farmers/producers and small is useful, the TRWMA Board felt that given the small a majority of Iowa. According to the USDA Economic town residents. As part of RWA, Iowa NRCS conducted size of the TRW communities (only seven have greater Research Service, only 12 counties had a higher an analysis of the census blocks provided by the US than 1000 residents and the largest is less than 4,000 unemployment rate in 2010 than Clayton County and the Census Bureau to calculate the population, which they residents) and given the condition of the storm water median income of the county was in the bottom third estimated at 32,332 residents. This analysis considered runoff systems (aging or limited systems that have of Iowa counties. Fayette County, which is also severely the percentage of any census block, community or rural, unknown or compromised boundaries) and given the impacted by Turkey River flooding, suffers from median within the TRW so only the percentage of the population undelineated boundaries of springsheds, the entire area income levels in the bottom fifth of Iowa’s counties and equivalent to the percentage of the census block that and population of each TRWMA community should be has unemployment rates higher than all but 18 counties is included in the physical TRW boundary is included invited to participate in plan development. Therefore, in Iowa. FEMA buyouts and continued private and public in the calculation. The analysis accounted for the fact all participating TRWMA communities are included in costs for flood recovery have severely impacted the that the TRW boundary dissects thirteen of the forty this plan in their entirety. An estimated 24,685 residents tax base of many of the small communities along the incorporated communities in the TRW. It also considered live within the municipal boundaries of the forty Turkey River. County funding for roads and bridges is the dissection of rural census blocks. According to the incorporated communities. Twenty-three of the forty so limited in this rural watershed that county engineers RWA, there are an estimated 5,090 total farm operators communities joined the TRWMA. The total population estimate “Dozens of bridge will deteriorate to the point in the watershed and these operators manage 3,404 of the participating TRWMA communities is 20,641. of being unable to support the traveling public in the next farms that range from one acre to over 1,000 acres. The watershed is dominated by caucasian residents. five years.” Approximately 14% of residents in the participating The size of farms in the TRW varies, but is generally TRWMA communities registered as something other smaller than those found in other areas of Iowa. The RWA than white during the last census. found that 8% are 1-9 acres, 19% are 10-49 acres, 30% are 50-179 acres, 28% are 180-499 acres, 10% are 500- The financial capacity of TRW residents, communities, 999 acres, and 5% are over 1,000 acres. The Census of and counties to deal with water quantity and water Agriculture is authorized under Public Law 105-113 and quality issues is limited. Clayton County, which is the uses the definition of a farm as any place from which last county in the watershed before the Turkey River $1,000 or more of agricultural products are produced empties into the Mississippi River and the county most and sold, or normally would have been sold, during the severely impacted by flooding, has historically been one TRW Producer census year. of the poorer counties in the state of Iowa, with higher
2 Storm Water Runoff & Smart Planning SECTION TWO G
drainage areas within and through the communities. Participants used the maps to locate existing stormwater infrastructure and existing or ongoing SMART planning/ practices. They were also asked to take the maps back to their communities to gather additional input about which SMART practices their community may be interested in implementing and specific practice locations. Northeast Iowa RC&D planning personnel also presented to city councils on request, explaining the TRWMA goals, SMART planning, and opportunities for the communities to implement SMART planning practices.
Community meeting participants were also provided with opportunities for sharing, brainstorming, and collaboration. Discussions lead to proposed collaborations between multiple communities. Community leaders from four TRWMA communities also met with Northeast Iowa RC&D planning personnel, the ct Dedica Monona Storm Water Runoff Proje tion Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship (IDALS) Urban Conservationist, and local private engineers to review projects and tour their community 2.G Storm Water Runoff & Smart Planning: prevention. Participants learned about SMART Planning to further develop ideas for improved community storm A series of research and planning meetings were held and shared information about existing community water management. Some communities worked with for the 23 TRWMA communities. Each community was planning efforts and their community stormwater Northeast Iowa RC&D planning personnel and/or their invited to bring a team of community leaders that could infrastructure. Northeast Iowa RC&D planning personnel local Watershed Specialist to explore opportunities and include city council members, the city administrator, the provided large-scale maps for each community showing determine how their community projects could help mayor, city facilities personnel, and/or other community the watershed area that drains into each community and slow water and improve water quality in local streams members interested in SMART Planning and/or flood the flow and extent of the natural community runoff/ and tributaries to the Turkey River.
27 28
Through the community meetings, planners were able to determine that because they are small and have limited resources, the twenty-three communities participating in the TRWMA have relatively simple stormwater runoff systems. City of Monona Many have curb and gutter infrastructure that Natural Water Flow is old and aging, with limited capacity and/or system flaws. Several have no curb and gutter, instead relying on slope and overland flow. When this project started, although the communities of Elkader, Volga, Garber, and Littleport had sustained major floods that resulted in FEMA buyouts and community parks, only three TRW communities had incorporated any SMART planning/practices into their community storm water plan or infrastructure, West Union, Calmar, and Postville. The projects in West Union and Calmar were both components of larger Soil and Water Conservation District watershed projects in Otter Creek and Lake Meyer respectively. Postville’s projects were small scale localized runoff projects.
Since the TRWMA was formed, two additional communities (and one county) have implemented SMART planning/practices, Monona, Elgin, and Fayette County. Several continue the process of developing plans for incorporation of SMART Community Flow Map practices into community projects.
2 SECTION TWO G
wn St sored tland 1. West Union Downto reetscape 2. State Revolving Loan Spon Project Demo 3. Calmar We
1. West Union – West Union, population 2,444, is a 3. Monona – Monona, population 1,518, was the first 2. Calmar – Calmar, population 965, has developed a national model for small community, SMART planning/ Iowa community approved for a State Revolving Loan diverse small community storm water runoff system, community infrastructure. In 2008, when it was time Fund Sponsored Projects Program, which they used to incorporating complementary and affordable natural to replace streets, sidewalks, utilities, and stormwater install permeable pavers for improved water quality and plantings and community policies and ordinances to management systems, they championed the practices reduced stormwater runoff. (They were approved for a create an aesthetically pleasing system that fosters of sustainable urban design and were designated second project in 2015). Both projects are adjacent to an clean water and minimizes storm water runoff. They as a Green Pilot Program by the Iowa Department unnamed tributary and complement existing community have developed bio-swales, stormwater runoff wetlands, of Economic Development. Since then, they have natural areas. Monona is also in the process of investing butterfly gardens, shelterbelts, and native prairie/oak worked to implement green infrastructure throughout millions of dollars to separate sewer and stormwater savanna plantings. They also lead the region in adoption a six block area of their historic downtown. They have and to educate residents about how the community can and implementation of city policies that support clean installed a diverse suite of practices that complement use SMART planning/practices to improve their systems water. City ordinances and antidegradation ordinances their community and create a dynamic, aesthetically and reduce costs. Existing practices include permeable exclude grass clippings and other harmful materials pleasing, modern system of stormwater management pavers in parking areas and streets, natural areas, rain from being deposited into the storm sewer system, including permeable pavers, bioswales, rain gardens, gardens and bioswales, and encouragement of pond/ reduce phosphorous applications, and encourage turf green roof, native plantings, and retention ponds. wetland development on farms outside the city. grass management.
29 30
4. Elgin Permeable Pavers 5. Postville Native Planting 6. St Lucas 2008 Flood
4. Elgin – Elgin, population 665, is located in a 5. Postville - Postville, population 2,176, has a history 6. St.Lucas - The small community of St. Lucas, population precarious position in the TRW at the confluence of of using native vegetation to develop natural runoff 140, is rethinking storm water runoff and community Otter Creek and the Turkey River near the Fayette areas in parks. They recently began seeking ways to infrastructure. Stormwater runoff from nearby farm County and Clayton County line. This small community use other SMART planning/practices. They worked fields and natural areas converge on this community. In recently completed a downtown revitalization project with Northeast Iowa RC&D to submit a proposal the past, community leaders and residents have tried to that incorporated permeable pavers into parking to develop of a wetland/pond area near their high move storm water runoff through the town as quickly components on either side of their main street. Elgin school as a storm water runoff measure to slow and as possible by using a series of culverts. In 2015, after also has two riparian wetlands that provide storage filter agricultural runoff that flows through their town. considering the deterioration of the culverts and the for storm water runoff and enhance water quality. Because Postville is a culturally diverse community, they cost of replacement, community leaders decided that In 2015, they completed a bottomland hardwood proposed incorporating multilingual educational kiosks instead of spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to planting and work closely with the Fayette County and signage. Although the proposal was not funded, increase the size of their culverts, they would explore Conservation Board, who has a nature center and the city is continuing to explore their options for that working with upstream landowners and partners to an extensive county natural area just across the project, as well as other public and private partnerships identify options for holding water on the land and install Turkey River, to provide conservation educational that propose the use of permeable pavers in city and storm water retention basins, bioswales, and raingardens opportunities for residents and travelers. private business parking areas and city streets. at a fraction of the cost.
2 Public & Private Outreach Organizations SECTION TWO H
that are focused on implementing practices that improve water quality, which can by their inherent nature also reduce storm water runoff, has decreased in recent years as federal and state conservation technical assistance and program budgets have been reduced.
Seven county and one regional United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) offices are charged with implementing and providing technical assistance for USDA/NRCS federal soil conservation and water quality programs in the TRW. NRCS’s mission is to “provide resources to farmers and landowners to aid them with conservation.” “Ensuring productive lands in harmony with a healthy environment” is their priority. NRCS has the ability and federal authority to address any resource concern or combination of resource concerns during the conservation planning process CS, Iowa DNR, IDALS, SWCD Personne at any scale. That includes resource concerns related mittee Meeting - Iowa NR l and County Engineers TRWMA Technical Com to water retention and storm water runoff reduction. Unfortunately, in recent years they lack the funding to 2.H Existing Public & Private Outreach work in county, state, and federal positions that are assumed go with the authority. The PL-566 program, which was Organizations: In the TRW Survey of Landowners, 60% to be responsible for this task are currently hired to focus an important funding source to address water retention of respondents said they would be willing to take action to on other related priorities, including water quality projects, and storm water runoff, was last funded in 2010 and improve water quality or decrease flooding. Unfortunately, wildlife habitat restoration, and emergency response. The there is no ongoing PL-566 in the TRW. Currently- there is currently no single entity that is providing technical work these employees accomplish may help reduce or in funded NRCS programs are focused on farm-scale assistance in the TRW to specifically help those landowners some cases increase storm water runoff. However, even the projects and other resource concerns (water quality, implement practices that reduce flooding. Personnel that number of county, state, and federal employees in the TRW wildlife habitat, etc.).
31 32
Each USDA/NRCS county office in Iowa has traditionally to work on and charge their time to specific programs, residents or producers themselves. Each SWCD in the had a federal NRCS District Conservationist assigned so they rarely seek out landowners to encourage them TRW is governed by an elected county board of SWCD to provide leadership and implement NRCS programs to participate in conservation practices. Commissioners. The majority of the personnel hired in their county. Some county offices have also been by SWCDs are hired for temporary positions when the assigned NRCS Soil Conservationists, Soil Technicians, State agencies also assign personnel to county SWCD secures a competative grant for a watershed Engineers, and other federal personnel, depending NRCS offices to provide technical support and project in a HUC 12 watershed. HUC 12 watersheds are on their workload or approval of competative special oversee special projects, typically watershed/water typically between 10,000 and 35,000 acres and would projects. Regional, multi-county, NRCS offices, called quality projects. Howard County recently lost a State be considered sub-watersheds of the TRW. Area Offices, have historically provided oversight and Environmental Specialist that had been assigned to work highly specialized personnel to assist county offices on watershed projects. The Iowa DNR has a Private Lands The majority of the TRW has never been the focus of any including a Wetland Specialist, Soil Scientist, Grazing Wildlife Biologist that conducts outreach to an eighteen- SWCD HUC 12 watershed project. Focused watershed Specialist, engineers, and other technical support. The county area of Northeast Iowa and provides technical projects in the TRW in the past fifteen years, before the TRW is served by an NRCS Area Office that provides assistance to SWCDs in the area. This employee is development of the TRWMA, encompassed a total of only oversight to, and serves, a 22-county area. stationed at the NRCS Area Office in West Union. They 85,125 acres or 8% of the total watershed, as compared to also have a Private Lands Wildlife Technician stationed the Upper Iowa River Watershed where focused watershed In recent years, as USDA/NRCS budgets have been cut, in Elkader. Pheasants Forever has a Farm Bill Biologist projects have targeted over 90% of the 640,000 acre NRCS county and regional offices serving the TRW have stationed in Delaware County. watershed during that same time period. It is also notable that lost personnel and experience. District Conservationists none of the projects in the TRW have been related to flood in two of the TRW counties now oversee two counties The seven county SWCDs in the TRW are uniquely prevention. All were focused on improving water quality. each, in what is known as a “shared management unit.” positioned to provide direct outreach and technical Retiring or transferred county personnel positions assistance to producers and community members. Since the formation of the TRWMA, SWCDs in Fayette, have been left vacant or eliminated in Fayette County, Because SWCDs are county organizations, they have the Clayton, and Winneshiek counties have implemented new Chickasaw County, and Clayton County. Retiring or flexibility to work on projects as funding and time allows. state funded projects in the TRW. The success of these transferred federal regional personnel have also been They also have the experience, partnerships, training, SWCDs in securing the funding for these projects was greatly lost including the region’s only Soil Scientist and the only and equipment needed to successfully provide one-on- improved by their participation in the TRWMA, which was Grazing Specialist. Fayette County and Howard County one assistance and outreach to producers. Producers in some cases a requirement (being in a WMA area). In the have both lost full time State Technicians. The remaining are typically comfortable working with and trust SWCD other instances, the TRW was selected by the state of Iowa federal employees in USDA/NRCS offices are required employees as these employees are generally local as a targeted watershed for Nutrient Reduction Strategy
2 SECTION TWO H
demonstration project funding. HUC 12 SWCD projects NRCS employees were also invited to give input through with equal priority to water quality improvement and soil that were pre-TRWMA and post-TRWMA formation, the TRWMA Technical Committee, at meetings and through conservation. CDI supports legislation to provide funding are shown in Figure 2.H.1 Current and Past Watershed one on one discussions with Northeast Iowa RC&D planning and technical assistance through SWCDs for the express Projects in the TRW. The post TRWMA projects, shown as staff. The SWCD Commissioners noted that although they purpose of reducing flooding and the resulting damage to current projects, include the Central Turkey River Nutrient have not been tasked with reducing flooding, many of the public and private infrastructure. Reduction Demonstration Project (Winneshiek County), same practices they have been promoting to improve water Upper Rogers and Silver Creek Project-Demonstration of quality can also be used to reduce flooding. To that end, the Explanation: SWCDs have long been tasked with water quality Targeted Nutrient Reduction Systems for Clayton County TRWMA SWCD Commissioners, led by the Fayette County improvement and soil conservation, but have never been (Clayton and Allamakee Counties), and Upper Otter SWCD with technical assistance from the TRWMA, drafted asked to reduce flooding or mitigate the effects of drought. Creek Watershed and Otter Creek Flood Reduction IFC a resolution for the SWCD state organization, Conservation It is our belief that in addition to water quality improvement Phase II Project (Fayette County). These projects have Districts of Iowa (CDI), which requested that CDI make and soil conservation, water management to reduce flooding helped SWCD develop relationships with producers in flood mitigation an SWCD long term goal and that CDI and the impacts of drought should be given equal priority by targeted watersheds. However, because of project funding support state legislation to “provide funding and technical CDI, SWCDs, and funders. SWCD’s have experienced staff, restrictions, all but one of the projects (Otter Creek) is water assistance through SWCDs for the express purpose of tools, and technology, partnerships, and relationships with quality focused rather than flood prevention. Although reducing flooding and the resulting damage to public and landowners in place to help implement flood mitigation and these new projects have increased outreach, they are all private infrastructure.” The full resolution reads as follows. drought reduction techniques to protect lives and property. “ limited in scope and geographic area. The Upper Otter Creek Project encompasses only 16,740 acres of the TRW “Changes in rainfall patterns combined with land use Although there are County Emergency Managers in every in Fayette County. Past and current projects collectively changes have resulted in devastating flooding alternating TRWMA county, they are not tasked with flood prevention. only encompass a combined total of 20% of the TRW, with periods of drought in Iowa. Although flooding and Instead they are tasked with being prepared to respond to reaching only a fraction of the TRW landowners that want to drought are natural occurrences in riverine environments, flooding and other disasters after they occur, as noted by implement practices. At the time of this plan development, the devastation caused by excessive rainfall and periods Clayton County, “The duty of the Emergency Management Chickasaw, Howard, Dubuque, Delaware, and Allamakee of drought can be reduced through improved water Director is to administer disaster services programs such County portions of the TRW have no employee charged management and increased landscape resilience. Water as severe weather warning and assist the federal and state with outreach to landowners in the TRW. management efforts can reduce flooding, protect private agencies in disasters.” and public infrastructure, reduce erosion, and improve The TRWMA SWCD Commissioner Committee met several wildlife habitat in and along Iowa’s rivers and streams. Northeast Iowa RC&D Inc., a regional, private, 501c3 times to provide input for this plan. SWCD, IDALS, DSC and CDI makes flood mitigation an SWCD long term goal nonprofit, has been working independently and with partners
33 34
in the TRW for over a decade. Much of the RC&D’s work in is offering free conservation planning assistance to ICGA participants will receive a map and cost estimate with the TRW has been direct outreach to producers qualified and ISA members in five priority watersheds: Floyd, Turkey, multiple options for each conservation practice. In addition, to enroll in specific USDA and State programs related to Middle Cedar, and East and West Nishnabotna. Members in one LICA contractor in each watershed will use the same woodland establishment and timber stand improvement, these watersheds can call, email, or attend meetings to get technology to provide conservation planning. The planning more specifically providing information to producers that free planning assistance for grassed waterways, wetlands, assistance relies on a suite of conservation practice planning qualify to enroll acres in the federal CP31, a program to ponds, sediment basins, and soil loss assessments. Network software developed by Iowa-based small-business, Agren.” increase hardwood forest acres along rivers. The RC&D has also conducted one-on-one outreach to landowners that have timber enrolled in Iowa’s Forest Reserve Program. The RC&D established and coordinated water quality monitoring at over 50 sites in the TRW from 2012-2014. They established the TRW Alliance and were instrumental in establishment of the TRWMA. They are currently assisting the TRWMA with research, grant writing, and development of this plan and have secured funding to conduct additional research for the TRWMA, to work with producers throughout the watershed on rainfall and soil moisture research, and to implement major public education and outreach projects in the TRW.
The Iowa Conservation Action Network (IACAN) is a partnership formed by the Iowa Corn Growers Association, Iowa Soybean Association, and Iowa Land Improvement Contractors Association. The IACAN website notes the following work in the TRW. “The IACAN network is a private sector initiative to demonstrate technology- based conservation practice planning to accelerate past watershed projects in the Turkey River Watershed Figure 2.H.1 Current and implementation of Iowa’s Nutrient Reduction Strategy. ICAN
2 Section THREE Community Based Planning
35 36
Local Leadership: TRWMA SECTION THREE A
the mutual advantage of the political subdivisions involved. The TRWMA has a 28e agreement, as well as bylaws, which together establish the organizational structure and ensure the partnership is managed professionally and serves as a communications link with participating political subdivisions.
The TRWMA was established as follows. In 2010, Northeast Iowa RC&D, a regional 501c3 nonprofit sponsored by SWCDs and Boards of Supervisors from a seven-county region, secured a grant from the McKnight Foundation to foster partnership and collaboration in the TRW. As a result, county, state, and federal partners joined together informally as the TRW Alliance. The TRW Alliance partners began meeting quarterly, monitoring water quality each month at 50 sites in the TRW, conducting a GIS analysis, and completing a Rapid Watershed Assessment to understand water quality and water quantity issues in the TRW. TRW Alliance participants included SWCD personnel anagement Authority Board Meeting and NRCS District Conservationists, county engineers, Turkey River Watershed M county conservation board directors. IDALS, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Iowa NRCS, Iowa DNR Fisheries, Iowa DNR 3.A Local Leadership: TRWMA (Turkey River provides that two or more political subdivisions (defined as Hatchery and Northeast Iowa RC&D personnel. Northeast Watershed Management Authority): The most including cities, counties and/or soil and water conservation Iowa RC&D developed the www.turkeyriver.org website prominent formal planning entity focusing on the Turkey districts located within the same United States Geological to share project information with partners and the public. River Watershed as a hydrologic system is the TRWMA. Survey Hydrologic Unit Code 8 watershed), may enter into The work that the TRW Alliance accomplished set the stage The TRWMA Board provides a diverse, inclusive voice for agreement under Chapter 28E of the Code of Iowa to establish for the formation of the TRWMA, which has a more formal watershed residents. The TRWMA structure and participation a Watershed Management Authority to enable cooperation structure and is directed by local policy makers rather than is defined by the Iowa Code, Chapter 466B (2011), which in supporting watershed planning and improvements for natural resource technical personnel.
2 SECTION THREE A
The formation of the TRWMA was made possible by recognized that, because of the size and scope Partner 1: Partnership with the Clayton County Board of a grant that the Clayton County Board of Supervisors of the TRW, the extensive flooding and degraded Supervisors to secure grant funding for the secured from the Iowa Economic Development water quality would be difficult to address without development of a TRW Plan to reduce flooding Authority. Clayton County invited all municipalities, a coordinated effort of multiple jurisdictions and and improve water quality. counties, and SWCDs in the TRW to participate partnerships who can cross political boundaries, Partner 2: Partnership with the Iowa Flood Center to model in discussions about formation of the TRWMA. coordinate policies, develop programs and projects, flood reduction and nutrient reduction strategies. Invitations were delivered via US Postal Service, and add value to watershed management. Partner 3: Partnership with the Iowa Economic email, by phone, and in person at City Council Development Authority and the Iowa DNR 319 meetings, County Board of Supervisor meetings, According to the TRWMA Bylaws, the purpose of Program to develop a TRW Plan that is a and SWCD Commissioner meetings. Governmental the TRWMA shall be to, “enable cooperation in comprehensive working document that has local entities that responded were included in discussions supporting watershed planning and improvements in buy-in, provides expert guidance for the partners and decisions regarding the TRWMA structure, the TRW for the mutual advantage of the Members.” and provide regular updates and reports so membership commitment and responsibilities, The TRWMA Bylaws also note that, as outlined in Iowa others may learn from their efforts. contents of the TRWMA 28e agreement, and the Code Section 466B.23, a Watershed Management Partner 4: Partnership with the IFC, Fayette County, development of TRWMA Bylaws. Authority may perform all of the following: Fayette County SWCD to test modeling in the • Develop Assess the flood risks in the watershed. Otter Creek Sub-watershed. A total of thirty-five public entities, including • Assess the water quality in the watershed. The Turkey River Watershed Management Authority Board twenty-three communities, five counties, and seven • Assess options for reducing flood risk and improving has also agreed to the following: SWCDs, ultimately signed the final draft of the 28e • water quality in the watershed. • Encourage a comprehensive, multi-objective agreement and developed and approved bylaws. • Monitor federal flood risk planning and activities. planning approach to watershed Each participating governmental body appointed • Educate residents of the watershed area regarding management that values both water quality one representative and one alternate to serve on the • water quality and flood risks. and flood prevention, while fostering an TRWMA Board of Directors. • Allocate monies made available to the authority for understanding and use of SMART Planning purposes of water quality and flood mitigation. Principles. Unlike the TRW Alliance, the TRWMA is a formal • Foster exceptional communication to build partnership of political jurisdictions that have The TRWMA has pursued strategies to accomplish their partnerships and engagement that will result in political authority within some portion of the physical goals, including pursuing advantageous partnerships. long-term commitment and sustainability beyond boundary of TRW. The members of the TRWMA Existing TRWMA partnerships include the following: planning through implementation.
37 38
• Leverage professional, social, and financial resources The TRWMA Board has an Executive Committee By the nature of the organization, all the TRWMA Board to maximize planning and ensure implementation. elected from the Board of Directors, which consists meetings were public meetings and, as such, agendas • Help partners secure funding for projects, especially of a Chair, Vice Chair, Treasurer/Secretary, and four at for TRWMA Board meetings were posted by each funding that is directed through partners rather than large appointments. The Executive Committee includes of the thirty-five participating entities. Persons other through the TRWMA. at least one representative from a county, at least one than TRWMA Board members that attended TRWMA representative from a city, and at least one representative Board meetings were invited to make comment either The TRWMA is comprised of thirty-five participating from a SWCD. at the meeting or at a public comment page on the political subdivisions or members organizations, www.turkeyriver.org website. including twenty-three communities, seven soil TRWMA Board members agreed they would like their plans and water conservation districts and five county and initiatives to be developed with input from watershed To build the collective knowledge of the TRW as board of supervisors. Each of these entities has one residents. Because the size and population of the watershed a system, the hydrology of the watershed, and representative (and one alternate) on the TRWMA could inhibit communication, they encouraged formation the opportunities for collaborative and individual Board of Directors. The board representative and of committees. These TRWMA committees function action, the TRWMA Board invited local, state, and alternate must be appointed by a vote of the member within independently established guidelines determined federal public and private partners and experts to board or council. by the committee members themselves. They meet at present information at their meetings. This included their convenience to review and discuss the issues that presentations on several different topics by the Current TRWMA participating political subdivisions most directly impact them. They were asked to develop Iowa Flood Center and IIHR staff and graduate including the following: a consensus on recommendations and make those students, as well as speakers from communities that County Board of Supervisors: Chickasaw, Clayton, Fayette, recommendations to the TRWMA for review for inclusion had previously implemented SMART planning and Howard, Winneshiek in this and other TRWMA plans. Some committees provide practices, including Charles City, Dubuque, and West Soil and Water Conservation Districts: Allamakee, Chickasaw, research, technical insight and more detailed analysis and Union. The USDA/NRCS State Conservationist and Clayton, Delaware, Fayette, Howard, Winneshiek planning recommendations. Committees that provided Area Conservationists provided information on the Communities: Arlington, Calmar, Clermont, Cresco, input for this plan include the Community Committee, relationship between perennial vegetation, soil health, Elgin, Elkader, Farmersburg, Fayette, Fort Producer Group Committee, Technical Committee, and infiltration. Northeast Iowa RC&D provided Atkinson, Garnavillo, Hawkeye, Lawler, SWCD Commissioners Committee, County Infrastructure presentations related to various potential funding Maynard, Monona, Postville, Spillville, St Lucas, Committee, Education Committee, and Emergency sources and SWCD employees presented information St Olaf, Strawberry Point, Volga, Wadena, Management Committee. These committees are detailed regarding specific relevant county projects, programs Waucoma, West Union in the Public Engagement section of this plan. and watershed efforts.
2 Public Engagement SECTION THREE B
2. Public and Private Local Meetings: Open public meetings and field days were held at various times and locations and presentations were given to private organizations in the watershed on request. The meetings were used to disseminate information and gather input through facilitated small and large group discussion. Attendance at the meetings varied from twenty to sixty persons and typically included representation from the Boards of Supervisors, community leaders and farmers/ producers. Presentations included information about the TRW, the economic and environmental cost of flooding in the TRW, hydrology, storm water runoff practices, SMART planning, and other more specific topics like what is a WMA and soil health. Discussions following the presentations included opportunities for participants to brainstorm ideas and solutions and to provide input on any issue to the TRWMA Board of Directors.
Public Meeting in Cresco 3. State and Regional Meetings: TRWMA Board members and Northeast Iowa RC&D planners presented at statewide meetings, state and regional conferences and 3.B Public Engagement 1. The TRWMA Board meetings. Each of the TRWMA Board meetings to a legislative committee. These meetings provided of Directors held, and continues to hold, quarterly began with an informative presentation and additional learning opportunities, technical input, as well public meetings at the Postville YMCA. Each included opportunities for public comment and as regional and statewide perspectives. of the thirty-five participating member entities engagement. Community members other than is responsible for posting a meeting notice as TRWMA Board members attended every meeting. 4. Turkey River Website: The www.turkeyriver.org required by the TRWMA 28e agreement, by The TRWMA Board also used several other website was established and maintained to foster local policy, and by state law that governs open methods to engage the public in planning. communication and provide information to the
39 40
TRWMA Board and the public. The website includes recommendations. Educational presentations were state, and federal partners involved in the Technical meeting agendas and minutes, watershed happenings, given by experts and advisors at several of the Committee have been working together to evaluate past power point and videos of presentations, maps, meetings when requested by committee members. and understand the TRW through scientific analysis research, the results of surveys, informative links, and For example, the Mayor from the City of Calmar of water quality and the watershed. Their goal is to a public comments section. presented to the Community Committee about help gather and share information, conduct scientific the SMART practices his community has already analysis, and better understand the watershed. They 5. Local Research: The TRWMA Board and Northeast implemented. Each of the major committees is work collectively to conduct water and watershed Iowa RC&D planning staff worked with partners, described below. monitoring and analysis. They strive to help TRW including the Iowa Soybean Association, the Iowa SWCDs and other TRW partners secure funding for Corn Growers, the Iowa Flood Center and IIHR, the Executive Committee: The Executive Committee is implementation of projects that target technical McKnight Foundation, the Iowa DNR, local SWCDs, and the only formal committee of the TRWMA Board. assistance and conservation dollars to specific areas other private and public partners, to directly engage The TRWMA Board members elect Executive of the watershed and provide maximum water quality producers in research, planning, and education. As a Committee members annually. They met as needed and flood prevention benefits for all TRW residents. result, producers across the watershed are engaged as a committee. As members of this committee, they in on-farm tile-outflow monitoring, water quality were also notified of all other committee meetings. During the planning process Technical Committee monitoring, rain and soil moisture monitoring, and members attended and/or presented at the TRWMA promotion of conservation practices. Their direct Technical Committee (aka TRW Alliance): The meetings. They provided feedback to the Iowa participation is an invaluable form of outreach, not TRW Alliance was formed in the fall of 2010. The Flood Center and IIHR regarding complex modeling. only to those that participate, but also to all the participants continued to meet as the TRWMA They conducted water monitoring throughout the producers in the watershed. Technical Committee after the formation of the watershed and worked with the TRWMA to identify TRWMA, providing technical assistance and guidance priority subwatersheds. 6. TRWMA Committees: The TRWMA engaged to the TRWMA Board and partner organizations hundreds of citizens in planning through the including the Iowa Flood Center and IIHR. Whereas Community Committee: The TRWMA communities development of committees. Each committee the TRWMA is a formal partnership, the Technical were invited to join a Community Committee to better included TRWMA Board members and other relevant Committee has always been an informal partnership understand SMART Planning and policies, identify watershed residents, advisors, and experts. These of agencies, organizations and conservation potential practices that could be implemented in their committees met on their own schedule to learn, professionals concerned about water quality and community, identify and secure potential funding share information, brainstorm, and develop plan water quantity (flooding) issues in the TRW. The local, sources, and work with other communities to better
2 SECTION THREE B
understand opportunities for partnership. City Council and then made recommendations based on their updates and information regarding development of members, Mayors, City Administrators, and interested knowledge and expertise. Most of the participating on-road structures in Fayette County where Phase citizens attended the meetings. Northeast Iowa commissioners were also active producers from the II of the Iowa Flood Center Project was underway RC&D planners provided community drainage maps TRW; many had been serving as elected commissioners in Otter Creek, a subwatershed of the TRW. He also for each community and worked with participants to for decades. The Commissioners Committee, with provided information regarding interactions with EPA help them understand how they could incorporate input from NRCS District Conservationists, was also in regard to policy and on-road structures. Northeast SMART practices into their public and private spaces. instrumental in calculating and recommending specific Iowa RC&D personnel also met with Iowa Homeland and realistic practice quantities for individual counties Security and Emergency Management personnel to Participants shared information about past and and the TRW as a system. further investigate options. proposed community projects and funding opportunities. After sharing the information with County Infrastructure Committee: County Engineers Some county engineering departments, as staff community members, most of these committee from each of the participating TRWMA Board of time and budgets permitted, followed up committee members identified specific practices their Supervisor counties met as a committee to discuss meetings by completing culvert inventories to help communities would like to implement and provided and evaluate the impact and frequency of flooding inform the planning process. This committee also them to the TRWMA Board. Some mapped specific to county infrastructure, with an emphasis on county hosted engineers and partners from throughout locations for those practices and provided those to roads and bridges and the potential for on-road the four-state Driftless Area to discuss ideas and the TRWMA Board; others met with local and state structures. They also discussed and developed related policy for infrastructure development. The ideas and planning personnel and engineers to develop site- existing and potential policy that could slow storm policy developed by this committee were ultimately specific plans and specifications and then began the water runoff without increasing any county’s liability. presented to the TRWMA Board for inclusion in this process of submitting applications for grant funding County Supervisors and SWCD Commissioners were plan as well as to each county Board of Supervisors to implement specific practices and projects. invited to attend these meetings and several joined and a six-county regional Supervisor group. Every periodically because interest in this committee’s work participating TRWMA Board of Supervisor ultimately Commissioners Committee: All SWCD Commissioners was high. Northeast Iowa RC&D planners completed adopted the policy developed through this committee. and Assistant Commissioners from every participating GIS analysis of potential on-road structures and TRWMA SWCD were invited to be part of the insight into processes. The engineers garnered advice Producer Group Committee: Producers from Commissioners Committee. During night and daytime regarding policy development and maintenance throughout the TRW were engaged in the planning meetings, these commissioners discussed current from County Attorneys, SWCDs and Boards of process in several ways. Small and large group public conditions, programs, challenges, and special projects Supervisors. The Fayette County Engineer provided meetings, where the majority of the participants were
41 42
producers, were held in Clayton, Fayette, Winneshiek and Howard counties. Input was also gathered from producers at County Farm Bureau meetings. A special meeting for TRW producers was held at the Dairy Center in Winneshiek County and the Iowa Corn Growers, Iowa Soybean Association, and Iowa Farm Bureau county offices helped promote the meeting to their respective producer groups. A written survey was sent to 1,500 watershed residents, including 1,000 producers, to gather opinions and attitudes.
The Producer Group Committee was formed after input had been gathered from individual producers. Several different local, county, and state producer groups were invited to participate including the Iowa Soybean Association, Iowa Corn Growers Association, Iowa Pork Producers Association, Practical Farmers of Iowa, Iowa Cattlemen’s Association, Iowa Dairy Association, and the Iowa Farm Bureau. Pheasants Forever and Clayton County Conservation Awareness Network representatives were also invited to join this committee. This committee shared information about their current initiatives and outreach, and communication strategies. They reviewed input from TRW producers and developed a set of recommendations for the TRWMA Board regarding CD, Discussion R this plan. They also provided match and committed k, Hosted by Fayette County SW egarding Retention Basins Field Day In Otter Cree to outreach and communication for grants and
2 SECTION THREE B
TRW WebCsiatpet: iwonw Nwe.teudrkeedyriver.org
43 44
proposals that will help implement portions of this issues. All county emergency managers were invited regarding practices that should be used throughout plan. Farm Bureau provided funding for producer to participate in this committee as were interested the TRW, and specific, regarding targeted projects involvement in soil moisture and rainfall monitoring supervisors, city fire department personnel, and subwatersheds. The group also provided input in three TRW counties. county engineers, city administrators, and county regarding related recommendations that had been conservation board directors if they were known made by other committees, very notably endorsing the Education Committee: The Education Committee to be actively involved in emergency planning, recommendations from the Commissioners Committee. was comprised of a diverse group of experts from management and/or response. This committee was each of the other committees, including persons of formed at the request of the TRWMA Board, who RCPP Committee: The Regional Conservation various backgrounds such as farmers/producers, wanted their input but also felt these entities could Partnership Program Committee (RCPP Committee) landowners, community members, biologists, county benefit from research underway in the TRW and was comprised of members of several other conservation personnel, SWCD Commissioners the flood prevention modeling in progress at the committees, including the County Infrastructure and staff, elected officials, and local educators. Iowa Flood Center and IIHR. Personnel from the Committee, Commissioners Committee, TRWMA They collectively worked to consider, combine, and Iowa Flood Center and IIHR presented information Executive Committee, and Fisheries Committee as recommend education and outreach ideas from regarding new flood forecasting tools that will soon well as new outside groups and partners including the various committees, TRWMA Board members be available to the public. Committee members Trout Unlimited, the League of Women Voters, and partners. They also proposed and considered provided feedback and input on the modeling and Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation representatives, new ideas. The Education Committee made the the related website. Pheasants Forever, engineers from others states, and final recommendations for TRWMA education other partners. This committee considered how the and outreach to the TRWMA Board. Some of their Fisheries Committee: The Fisheries Committee was TRWMA partners could work with public and private recommendations were also included in grants and comprised primarily of the regional Iowa DNR fisheries entities in the four-state Driftless Area of Iowa, proposals that were submitted to or by partners to personnel and NRCS District Conservationists serving Minnesota, Illinois and Wisconsin. They developed foster successful implementation of this plan. the TRW counties. The Trout Unlimited Project Manager recommendations for a Driftless Area watershed for the Driftless Area Restoration Effort and a Fisheries initiative that clearly defined and prioritized Emergency Management Committee: This committee Biologist with the US Fish and Wildlife Service were implementation of practices, and documented was comprised of city and county personnel that also invited. These entities work with local groups available local funding for projects in the TRW over formally or informally respond to or deal with to complete the majority of the in-stream and near- the next five years. After approval of the TRWMA flooding issues as they relate to public health and/ stream restoration and enhancement work in the TRW. Board, the majority of the recommendations from or city or county infrastructure and other related Recommendations from this committee were general, this committee were incorporated into this plan.
2 Survey of Residents SECTION THREE C
3.C Survey of Residents A 2013 survey of 1,500 rural and urban watershed residents revealed that thousands of watershed residents have been impacted by flooding in Question 3: Have you impacted by flooding in the past 5 years?
the TRW and watershed residents feel that not enough is 195 being done to prevent flooding. The survey was conducted 200 by Northeast Iowa RC&D on behalf of the TRWMA Board. 126 Rural Landowners (n=321) 150 Major findings from the survey results include the following. Urban Residents (n=84) (The full results of this survey are included as Appendix 6 100 61 26 and available to the public at www.turkeyriver.org.) 50
0 Result1: 3 out of 4 people that were impacted by flooding in Yes No the TRW were impacted more than once.
Question 4: If you answered ‘Yes’ to question #3, how often have you been Result 2: Approximately 30% of rural landowners and 18% impacted by flooding in the past 5 years? of urban landowners in the watershed report having been impacted by flooding in the past five years. 66 70 Rural Landowners (n=128) 60 Urban Residents (n=26) Result 3: 75% of TRW residents report they knew someone 50 else who was impacted by flooding in the past five years. 40 32 90 30 Result 4: 59% of rural landowners and 70% of urban felt 20 10 10 that not enough is being done to prevent flooding 10 6 in the TRW. 0 1 Time 2-3 Times 3 or more Result 5: 60% of respondents said they would be willing to take action to improve water quality or ents Have Been Impacted By Flooding The Majority of Respond decrease flooding.
45 46
Question 12: Are you interested in learning more about what you could do to reduce flooding or improve quality in the Turkey River Watershed?
200 Rural Landowners (n=273)
150
100 181 92 50
0 Yes No
50 Urban Residents (n=75) 40 42 30 33
20
0 Yes No
ity of Respondents Are Interested in Learning More About What They Can Do Survey Results Indicate the Major
2 Section FOUR Watershed Research, Analysis and Modeling
47 48
Watershed Research & Assessment SECTION FOUR A
by USGS, and water quality monitoring and analysis conducted by the TRW Alliance/Technical Committee was also useful. To maximize the efficiency of the implementation, GIS data should be updated periodically as new data layers become available and conditions change throughout the implementation period of this plan. Below is a summary of data collection, research, and modeling done in conjunction with the planning process.
4.A Rapid Watershed Assessment The Iowa Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) completed a Rapid Watershed Assessment (RWA) on the Turkey River Watershed in 2012. According to NRCS, the purpose of a RWA is to “provide initial estimates of where conservation
Graph Courtesy IFC investments would best address the resource concerns of landowners, conservation districts, o measure flood reduction in Otter Creek Watershed and the TRW and other community organizations and IFC models were used t stakeholders.” The RWA is a summary of the physical characteristics, water quality, threatened Research, data analysis and modeling was goals for plan implementation. Much of the data and endangered species, census and social data used to inform and educate the TRWMA Board analysis for this plan was completed by NRCS, and resource concerns of the TRW. The RWA also and subcommittee members throughout the the Iowa Flood Center/IIHR, and Northeast Iowa has a summary of hydrologic modeling done in the planning process. Information from data analysis, RC&D although each received input from other Otter Creek Watershed to simulate the effects of research, and modeling provided a means to organizations and individuals. Background geologic flood management structures on the landscape. make informed decisions about the watershed research conducted by the Iowa DNR through the The Turkey River Watershed RWA is included in based on existing conditions and set realistic Big Springs Project, flow monitoring conducted Appendix 3.
2 Watershed Analysis & Modeling SECTION FOUR B & C
4.B GIS Analysis Additional GIS data and analysis in the TRW was done by the Iowa Flood Center for Phase Watersheds Project. The goal of Phase II is to couple not included as part of the NRCS RWA was completed I of the Iowa Watersheds Project using the Hydrologic intensive hydrologic modeling with implemented flood by Northeast Iowa RC&D. RC&D gathered existing GIS Engineering Center’s Hydrologic Modeling System (HEC- mitigation practices. Construction of the flood reduction layers from a number of public sources including the HMS). This modeling system is designed to “simulate the ponds will occur in 2015 and the designs and storage Iowa Geological Survey, Iowa Department of Natural precipitation-runoff processes of a watershed.” These capacities of these structures will be incorporated into Resources, Iowa Department of Transportation, processes include precipitation, infiltration, transpiration, the Hydrogeosphere model. Hydrogeosphere is able 2010 Census Data, and others and organized and evapotranspiration, and sublimation as well as to model the entire hydrologic cycle and take into catalogued the existing data. Northeast Iowa RC&D groundwater and overland flow. HEC-HMS combines two account interactions between surface and subsurface created and analyzed new GIS data layers as needed main components, basin conditions and meteorological flow regimes. Hydrogeosphere requires a large amount including flow patterns, community drainage patterns, models, and uses mathematical equations to simulate the of input data and intense CPU capabilities and is more community watersheds, potential pond locations, hydrologic processes. When the input basin conditions are suitable to smaller watersheds like Otter Creek. The and others. Analysis of GIS data was performed as changed, such as flood mitigation practices are added, the Otter Creek Watershed was chosen because it is a good needed based on input from the TRWMA Board and output results then change reflect those changes. For the representation of the diversity of land cover and land subcommittees. TRW, several scenarios were modeled including adding use to that of the TRW. 402 flood management structures (ponds) into the existing 4.C IIHR/Iowa Flood Center Hydrologic basin conditions. Adding the 402 flood management Analysis and Modeling Hydrologic modeling structures into the TRW resulted in a 4.6% decrease in was conducted by the Iowa Flood Center and IIHR discharge at the USGS gauge in Garber. The results prove to quantify the results of flood mitigation efforts on that flood management practices strategically placed in a stream discharges. Two hydrologic models were used large scale watershed can have a tremendous effect on to complete the modelling assessments. A surface stream discharge. The full report for the TRW using the model, HEC HMS, was used to assess current and HEC-HMS model is included as Appendix 2S. proposed landscape conditions and the effects from large rainfall events. A more sophisticated model, 2. Otter Creek Sub-watershed (Hydrogeosphere Hydrogeosphere, was used to simulate hydrologic Modeling) - Otter Creek is a HUC 12 scale watershed of responses to flood mitigation efforts in the Otter approximately 30,000 acres in the central portion of the Creek Watershed which is a sub-watershed of the TRW. TRW. Otter Creek was chosen for Phase II of hydrologic Rain Gauge Installation in the TRW 1. Turkey River Watershed (HEC HMS) - Hydrologic modeling assessments by the Iowa Flood center as part of the Iowa
49 50
Graph Courtesy IFC
e addition of ponds in upstream subbasins Volga River Response at Littleport to th
2 Section Five Proposed Strategies
51 52
Summary of Strategies SECTION FIVE A
The most efficient and cost effective ways to slow and capture runoff are implemented to maximize the amount of precipitation absorbed and held where it falls. Once precipitation becomes runoff, it is much more challenging to slow or stop and the practices required to do so tend to be higher cost. Some proposed practices for flood reduction, such as detention structures, have an immediate, tangible impact on reducing runoff and can be implemented quickly. Practices such as no-till and soil health improvement take longer to effectively reduce runoff but are more affordable to implement, remain effective as long as the practice is in place and do not require extensive effort or funding to maintain.
Many of the strategies have multiple economic and environmental benefits for the producer/ landowner and the watershed residents. For those
Graph Courtesy City of West Union reasons a multifaceted approach for implementation n -o Ossn eSe Ccotiomnmunity Strateg is necessary over the entire planning period to Cross Section oRfa Rina iGn aGrdaerdne Cr y successfully reduce flooding.
5.A Summary of Strategies The proposed of the watershed down to the lowest reaches. They The practices described in this plan are proven to strategies for this plan are to occur over a 20-year period are not intended to stop rainwater runoff but rather effectively prevent, reduce, slow, or capture runoff beginning in 2015 and will be spread across the entire to strategically slow runoff so that maximum stream before they become intense floods. The proposed TRW unless otherwise stated or prioritized to specific and river levels can be decreased and moderated to practices vary in popularity and depth of supporting subwatersheds or landscape positions. The strategies reduce incidence of flash flows, catastrophic flooding research, but all should be considered by watershed proposed in this plan are presented by objective and and the associated resulting economic, environmental residence looking for how they may contribute to the are designed to address excess runoff from the top and ecosystem damage. hydrologic system management. Continued on page 53
2 1. Technical Assistance SECTION FIVE B
5.B Objective 1: Develop a team of flood mitigation professionals The TRWMA believes that, because of the decline in existing conservation technical assistance at all levels, the urgency associated with flood prevention and the number of producers and community members (over 60% of the 5,090 producers on approximately 3,400 farms and 60% of community members from 23 communities) that are interested in implementing practices for which they would need technical assistance, there should be increased technical assistance in the Turkey River Watershed. This should include county, regional and community technical assistance to ensure that practices can be installed in a timely manner.
1. Flood Mitigation Technicians. TRW plan goal: A minimum of 5 Flood Mitigation Technicians will be ith Landowner and Producer to Disc assigned to the TRW for education and outreach and isors and Engineer Meet w uss On-Road Structure Clayton County Superv landowner engagement. The five flood mitigation technicians (FMTs) should coordinate activities with Over the next twenty years, it is likely that and technology. As new technology is available, each other, TRWMA and TRWMA Coordinator, TRW technology will allow for more efficient ways it should be added to the practices proposed Engineers, and SWCD watershed personnel to ensure to prevent flooding. Therefore, this document in this document to complement existing efficiency and maximize their efforts. FMTs should is intended to be a guide for flood reduction techniques or replace ineffective practices. work with landowners to provide information and with the current strategies known for reducing This should be a working document that changes education, conduct face to face outreach, and assist runoff and should be a working document that and adapts as technology or watershed needs with conservation planning and layout. They should changes over time to adapt to new information require. assist engineers with project placement, survey,
53 54
design, and implementation as well as gathering all (IDALS) has 4 urban conservationists to assist 5. TRWMA Coordinator. TRW plan goal:: 1 TRWMA necessary state and federal permits. FMTs should also communities across the state and are a great Coordinator. Provide assistance to the TRWMA assist with gathering data and GIS analysis as the TRW resource for communities. However, because Board of Directors to insure the TRWMA Plan is implemented. FMTs will be assigned regions of the demand of a large geographic region, functions at the highest level throughout within the watershed to concentrate their efforts for the IDALS urban conservationists have limited implementation of this plan including but landowner outreach. time to commit to the TRW communities. An not limited to administration, coordination, urban conservationist in the TRW would be able facilitation, grant writing, policy development, 2. Civil Engineers. TRW plan goal: a minimum of 3 Civil to focus their efforts across the watershed. outreach, communications, education, Engineers will be assigned to the TRW to work with They should coordinate their efforts with the partnership building and other technical landowners, counties, and SWCDs on project designs. TRWMA, FMTs, TRWMA Coordinator, and IDALS assistance as needed by the TRWMA Board of Engineers will provide expertise in planning, survey, Urban Conservationists to maximize efficiency Directors. This person will also oversee the design, and implementation of structural projects and to avoid duplicating efforts. The TRW urban reporting, documentation, research and analysis throughout the TRW. They will work closely with the Conservationist will assist communities with associated with the implementation of this plan. Flood Mitigation Technicians, County Engineers, and implementing storm water best management SWCDs to plan and design projects to maximize flood practices, including design and planning, as well reduction potential. as storm water policy development.
3. Urban Conservationist. TRW plan goal: a 4. Liaison & Outreach Coordinator for Private minimum of 1 Urban Conservationist that will Organizations. TRW plan goal: 1 Private Lands Liaison work with community leaders and residents and Outreach Specialist. The L&O Coordinator throughout the TRW to coordinate design and will work with private organizations such as maximize implementation of SMART Planning ducks unlimited, pheasants forever, wild turkey Practices to reduce runoff from urban areas. The federation, trout unlimited, and whitetails twenty-three TRWMA participating communities unlimited to develop projects on private land that are small communities with limited resources satisfy the objectives of this plan for reducing including access to trained professionals to assist runoff. The L&O Coordinator will facilitate with storm water management practices. Iowa efforts between organizations as well as between ICAN Planners Meeting with Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship organizations and private landowners.
2 2. Increase Infiltration SECTION FIVE C
precipitation before it becomes runoff is critical to reducing flooding by reducing the total volume of stormwater that reaches surface streams and rivers. The highest percentage of the TRW area falls into this landscape position category and therefore represents is capable of holding the greatest amount of stormwater runoff. Since the majority of the TRW, 52%, is in row crop production, as opposed to hay or small grains, the first opportunity to slow rainwater where it falls is in crop fields. As discussed earlier in this plan, the dynamic soil properties have a direct impact on the amount of microbes, fungi and bacteria that are found in healthy soil and allow soils to function as intended. The following practices representing
Photo Couresy www.cleanwateriowa.org objective 1 are intended to improve the dynamic soil properties and therefore increase mic soil properties and increase r infiltration and reduce runoff. Cover crops improve dyna
Practices: Reduced Tillage or No-Till, Cover 5.C Objective 2: Implement conservation most common land use type found in these Crops, Contour Buffer Strip, Grassed Waterway, practices that stop or slow rainwater where areas is productive agricultural land. With Strip Cropping, Tree and Shrub Establishment, it falls or increase rainwater infiltration so altered management strategies, rainfall and Prairie Strips, Rotational Grazing, Conservation that storm water runoff is reduced. The storm water runoff can be better infiltrated Reserve Program (CRP) first landscape position that will most into the soil, soil can be held on the land, and effectively reduce flooding is in the upper water can be managed where it falls if the land Supporting practices: Fencing, Livestock reaches and highest elevations of the TRW. The in the upper reaches of the TRW. Capturing Pipeline, Watering Facility, Water Well
55 56
1. Reduced tillage and no till systems. TRW plan goal: 281,715 acres or 50% of cropped acres with permanently reduced tillage or no-till systems.Soil disturbance is a major cause for soil health degradation. Reduced tillage or no-till systems are highly recommended practices for reducing soil disturbance by many of the TRWMA Board, TRWMA Committees, the Iowa Flood Center, and Producer Groups. Reduced tillage and no-till systems are used by many producers statewide in Iowa but a limited number of producers are using reduced tillage on all of their cropped acres every year. Technological advances in equipment and nutrient application methods have made these methods much more feasible and economical to producers, even those growing continuous corn. The number of acres currently in a reduced tillage system is difficult to estimate given the variability of use between years and producers.
While there is little cost typically associated with this practice outside of equipment purchase, a monetary per acre incentive would increase the use of this practice across the watershed. The key to this practice being successful for the producer and for runoff reduction is long term adoption. Incentives for no-till are typically short term and therefore those receiving the incentive revert to traditional tillage of minimizing soil disturbance in continuous corn operations Strip tillage is a method when the incentive period is over. For this reason,
2 SECTION FIVE C
it is recommended that incentives for reduced with this practice is it incurs more initial cost to many years. Grassed waterways were the most tillage systems are contingent on long-term the producer. Cost share programs have been highly utilized conservation method according adoption (such as a minimum of five years). established to help demonstrate the benefits to the TRW survey of landowners. All of these of cover crops but they vary widely across the practices are intended to capture runoff to 2. Cover crops. TRW plan goal: 281,715 acres state. Climate variation, application method, increase infiltration and prevent the formation permanently incorporating cover crop systems and cover crop varieties are also variables of rills and gullies in and around crop fields. (100,000 acres after 5 year cost share program). that can impact the degree of success or Cover crops are becoming more commonly failure of cover crops. Like reduced tillage Traditionally used methods such as contour incorporated for regular use on Iowa cropland. and no-till systems, new technology and buffers and grassed waterways vary greatly in Clayton County alone reported an increase application methods are making it easier and width and are typically mowed or cut multiple of 4,000 acres in cover crops from 2012 to more economical for producers to incorporate times per year. Frequent cutting and plant 2013. Cover crops have a number of important cover crops into their year to year operations. species typically used (such as brome grass benefits that contribute to improved water To encourage producers further incorporate or alfalfa) prevents the establishment of deep quality but also reducing runoff. Cover crops cover crops to assist with researching improved root systems that allow better infiltration. keep living roots in the soil during the periods application methods and timing as well as cover Prairie strips are strategically placed on before and after corn or beans are present. crop variety, it is recommended that an initial contours and at the foot of slopes to intercept This helps keep soil from being compacted, cost share program be established for the first runoff and allow it to absorb. Prairie strips are increases organic matter in the soil, and builds 5 years of implementation. planted with native tallgrass prairie grasses and the microfauna community. All of these factors forbs which have very deep root systems that improve soil health and increase the soil’s 3. Contour buffer strips, grassed waterways, prairie build healthy soil, provide ideal conditions for ability to infiltrate and hold water. The increased strips & strip cropping. TRW plan goal: In order of microbes, decrease compaction, and increase surface residue from cover crops also protects priority A) prairie strips, B) contour buffers, C) grassed the water holding capacity of the soil. Of the soil from eroding and prevents the formation waterways and d) strip cropping - 56,000 acres. four practices listed, prairie strips are the most of rills and gullies during heavy rains. Contour buffers, grassed waterways, and effective at reducing runoff, up to 40% in some prairie strips are practices that are intended to cases. Based on Iowa State Extension research, Like reduced tillage systems, the goal of the achieve the same end through slightly different 10% of a field planted into prairie strips can TRWMA is for cover crops to become an methods. Contour buffer strips and grassed treat runoff from the remaining 90% of the established practice with producers. A challenge waterways have been utilized by producers for field. Prairie strips are also a more cost efficient
57 58
Grassed waterway Rotational grazing Strip Cropping with hay filter strips
method of reducing runoff and nutrients from Upper Mississippi Valley Hill Country, compaction dedicated to taking less productive agricultural fields than traditional earthen terraces. of steep slopes from overgrazing has historically ground out of production and into perennial been a major problem in the Driftless Region grasses that protect soil from erosion and 4. Rotational grazing. TRW plan goal: 146,725 acres or 50% of Iowa and overly grazed pasture can have a runoff. CRP was a very popular program in of TRW pastured acres permanently in rotational systems. higher runoff coefficient than agricultural land. the 1990’s in Iowa but has seen a significant While cropped acres make up the largest land Rotational grazing ensures that pastures are not reduction in participation in Iowa due to low cover type in the TRW, pasture and hay are overgrazed and grasses and vegetation have a rent rates and high crop prices. CRP remains second highest land cover type at 27% of the chance to grow back, establish deeper roots a critical part of protecting vulnerable, less watershed. This estimate may be lower than the and more surface cover. Supporting practices of productive land in the TRW. With the most actual amount of pastured land because many of fencing and watering practices should be used in recent farm bill passed by US Congress, CRP the acres designated as forest are also grazed. conjunction with rotational grazing efforts. payments were increased to become more While pastureland is typically covered in perennial competitive with rental rates per acre. CRP grasses for grazing, overgrazing can cause 5. CRP. TRW plan goal: Retain existing acres and install can be used to set aside significant portions of compaction of the soil in these areas. According 20,000 additional acres (1,000 new acres installed land for runoff reduction as nearly zero runoff to Historical Agriculture and Soil Erosion in the per year x 20 years). CRP is an NRCS program comes from established grassland.
2 3. Reduce Rainwater Runoff & Flash Flows SECTION FIVE D
small water control structures strategically placed in the mid and upper reaches of the TRW to capture and hold runoff from small drainages. Smaller control structures are relatively low cost, simple to engineer and construct and when constructed in large numbers, effective at capturing runoff. Larger flood control reservoirs take a long time to engineer and construct, are very expensive, and have limited location potential. Another important advantage to smaller control structures is the limited risk in the event of a failing structure. When larger flood control reservoirs fail, they can actually cause more damage and cost than the flood they were intended to prevent.
The water control structures referred to above are commonly called ponds, sediment detention basins, and gully blocks. Regardless of the name or whether or not the structure permanently holds water, the purpose of these structures is to create a system or network of distributed tructures can capture runoff from small drainages storage for runoff that is then released more slowly after On-road water control s the peak runoff period following heavy precipitation. Given the variation of topography from west to east in the TRW, 5.D Objective 3: Slow down rainwater runoff becomes completely saturated or precipitation is falling the design of these structures will vary as the landscape and reduce the frequency and intensity of at a rate that exceeds the rate of infiltration, excess water and soil type demands. heavy flash flows into streams and rivers, will begin to run over land as runoff. This excess runoff thereby protecting aquatic and riparian habitat, can cause flash flooding, wash out roads and bridges, In the eastern portion of the TRW, especially Clayton streambanks, stream and river substrate, and is the eventual cause of major floods. As more runoff County, there are many ponds already in existence. conservation practices and private and public gathers, it becomes more powerful and thus more difficult Many of these structures have very little capacity to infrastructure. During intense rainfall events when soil to slow or stop. This plan proposes to create a network of hold runoff because they have filled with sediment
59 60
over time or are permanently filled with water. Some reaches of the TRW at a density of approximately 1 be used in place of culverts and small bridges that have of these structures could be restored to their former pond per every 2 square miles. Modeling results on the a tendency to wash out or receive damage during heavy holding capacity, however it is generally more cost Turkey River at Spillville, Eldorado, Elkader, and Garber flows. Wetlands are another design alternative for retaining effective to build a new structure than to restore an resulted in reductions of 16.5%, 5.9%, 3.8%, and 1.7% runoff before it enters streams and rivers. existing one. One possibility for utilizing existing, aged respectfully. Higher percentage discharge reductions retention structures is as a sediment trap above a newly occurred in the upper portions of the TRW because 2. Riparian buffers. TRW plan goal: 10 linear miles of constructed pond. Although the older structures cannot a higher acreage is controlled by retention structures streambanks protected with minimum of 60 foot buffers capture runoff very effectively, they are still effective at than in the lower reaches yet the precipitation was on both sides. Riparian Buffers are strips of perennial slowing runoff temporarily to allow sediment to filter distributed evenly across the entire area. grasses and forbs that are seeded a determined out before moving downstream. Sediment buildup is the distance along the edge of a given waterway. These primary cause of reduced effectiveness of any control Practices: Riparian Buffers, Sediment Basin, In-field Water grass strips intercept surface runoff and allow it to structure, small or large. and Sediment Control Basin, On-road Water and Sediment infiltrate into the soil as well as stabilize riparian banks. Control Basins, Wetland Creation, Wetland Restoration Like contour grass strips, riparian buffers that are The Hydrologic Assessment of the Turkey River Watershed planted into native tallgrass prairie grasses and forbs completed by the Iowa Flood Center/IIHR incorporated 1. In-field water and sediment control basins, on-road will have a greater benefit than other species. a system of distributed storage from ponds or retention water and sediment control basins, wetland creation structures into their hydrologic model to quantify the and restoration. TRW plan goal: 300 water and sediment reduction in discharge during large scale rain events. control basins (in-field or on-road), 50 wetlands created This assessment modeled a 50 year storm (5.67 inches or restored. The TRWMA recommends using each kind of rainfall) across the entire TRW with and without of control structure to make up the distributed storage the presence of 402 water control structures. It is system of ponds and wetlands. Water control structures noted in the assessment that the scenario of evenly on private lands vary in design based on topography and distributed rainfall across a large watershed like the landowner input. In addition to ponds on private land, the TRW is extremely unlikely but is required for modeling TRWMA County Infrastructure Committee made up of purposes. The results of the model were quantified at County Engineers and County Supervisors are seeking to locations where an existing USGS gauge exists so as install water retention structures using gravel county roads to compare modeling results to past major floods. The as the dam for retention (Figure 2.B.5 Stream Intersection Riparian Buffer ponds were distributed primarily in the mid and upper Points with County Roads Map). These structures can
2 4. Restore & Protect Stream Ecosystems SECTION FIVE E
reconnect streams with floodplains, restore in- stream habitat to improve flow, and increase the volume capacity of stream channels.
Practices: Stream shoreline Protection, Stream Habitat Improvement, Restore Floodplain Connectivity.
Supporting Practices: Riparian Forest Buffer, Riparian Buffers, Riparian Wetlands, Fencing, Access Control, Heavy Use Protection, Stream Crossing
1. Stream Shoreline Protection. TRW plan goal: 5 linear miles of streambank protection. Stream shorelines and banks can be protected in a number of different ways to prevent further damage and erosion which cause steep cut banks. High, vertical cut banks affect the hydrology of the river by accelerating water downstream, particularly during higher levels. Stream t with sloped banks and native prairie planting banks can be protected using strategically placed Streambank improvemen rock or riprap, native tallgrass prairie, woody material, or tree and shrub plantings. Stream bank protection 5.E Objective 4: Restore and protect stream/ over time because of sedimentation while stream projects should include sloping of the bank to a more river and near stream ecosystems to increase channels become more incised and disconnected gradual slope along with one ore more of the listed their capacity to hold storm water runoff and from former floodplains. These factors reduce the material protection. The TRWMA Fisheries Committee increase stability and resiliency during rainfall volume of water that a stream channel can hold, recommends using a x/1 slope paired with native and runoff events. Decades of floods, erosion, increase flash flows, and increase the velocity of tallgrass prairie species and strategic rock placement and sedimentation have taken a toll on river and water moving downstream. The following suite of for stream shoreline protection. Other options may be stream corridors. Streambeds have aggraded practices are intended to protect riparian areas, more appropriate where bank sloping is not possible.
61 62
Big Spring Hatchery is situated in Clayton County and raises and stocks trout into coldwater streams in Clayton and Fayette Counties. Big Spring Hatchery is a popular destination for schools for field trips, tourists, and fisherman. The Iowa DNR owns approximately one mile of river corridor above and below the hatchery. Parts of this section of the Turkey River are very good fishing but hard for anglers to access because of the steep eroded banks.
Hatchery personnel have proposed to do stream habitat improvement and stream shoreline protection along this section of the Turkey River to improve fish habitat, protect banks from further erosion, protect hatchery facilities, increase the storage of the river channel during high water, improve angler accessibility, and to provide a demonstration for visitors to the hatchery of these practices. The hatchery is visited by hundreds of people every year and would be a perfect location for demonstration of stream restoration along the Turkey River. The TRWMA supports this demonstration project.
important educational site in the TRW Big Spring Hatchery is an
2 SECTION FIVE E
The listed supporting practices are included to pastured sections of streams or rivers. Livestock with Turkey River at Big Spring Hatchery, the Turkey River be used as additional or complementary methods unhampered access to a stream or river can increase in Elkader, Otter Creek, and Bohemian Creek were for stream shoreline or bank protection. Riparian erosion by compacting soils and overgrazing of recommended for projects. All of these are important buffers, forested or prairie, stabilize soil and riparian vegetation. The practices included in this fisheries within the TRW and because of their high prevent erosion. Riparian buffer zones also serve plan are intended to limit livestock access to streams, usage, would make excellent demonstration sites as a final barrier to intercept runoff before it enters provide alternative watering locations, and protect for educating visitors about flood reduction, water streams and rivers. Riparian wetlands are found areas where stream access is required. quality improvement, fish habitat, and other topics. near streams and rivers in the stream or river valley. The TRWMA Fisheries also recommended that a Riparian wetlands are natural occurring water 2. Stream Habitat Improvement. TRW plan goal: HUC 12 watershed be selected based on analysis retention areas that increase floodplain storage and 5 linear miles of in-stream habitat improvement. and be used to demonstrate these practices and can intercept and reduce runoff. Stream habitat improvement refers to in-stream benefits they provide. improvements made between the banks of Fencing, livestock pipelines, watering facilities, water the stream or river. This can include, but is not 3. Restore floodplain connectivity. TRW plan goal: 5 wells, access control, heavy use protection, and limited to, lunker structures, strategically placed linear miles of streams. Stream channels that have stream crossings are all supporting practiced used in rock or boulders, riffle enhancement, and dam become incised also have sediment built up directly or obstruction removal. These projects should along the stream channel. The sediment buildup be done in conjunction with stream shoreline actually acts like a levy and increases current protection to maximize the benefits. In-stream velocity but lowers the total water volume holding improvements when combined with stream capacity of the stream. In some locations, such as shoreline protection can increase the stream’s where riparian wetlands have been cut off from ability to move sediment down and out of the natural flooding, removing excess sediment can system which deepens the channel and increases reconnect streams with their former floodplains. the storage capacity while also providing benefits During flood events, water is more likely to naturally to the aquatic community of species. spread over these areas protecting more vulnerable riparian areas downstream and recharging riparian The TRWMA Fisheries Committee recommended wetlands. Floodplain restoration should only be four specific project locations for stream shoreline completed where it will not directly damage existing Restricted access watering protection and stream habitat improvement. The infrastructure or property.
63 64
5. Protect Properties Near Streams & Rivers SECTION FIVE F
5.F Objective 5: Permanently protect and/or enhance highly sensitive, priority properties adjacent and near streams and rivers to increase the floodplain capacity.
Practices: Agricultural Conservation Easements, Stream Easements, Floodplain Easements
1. Protect properties near streams & rivers. TRW plan goal: 2,000 acres of agricultural conservation easements and 1,000 acres of stream easements. Landowners in the Driftless Area are passionate about their property. According to the survey of TRW landowners, more than 60% are interested in helping to reduce flooding or improve water quality on their land. How they decide to do that will vary. Some will want their lands to continue to function as working farms; others will prefer to transfer properties to conservation organizations, creating permanent habitat for wildlife. Voluntary permanent land protection through Agricultural Land Easements, fee title transfers and other conservation easements in strategic areas, including flood prone areas adjacent to streams and rivers and in hydrologically sensitive areas including side hills and bluffs are supported. ACEs and fee title are an important option that helps sustain the public and private investments and can be measure by number of properties and number of acres protected. Stream easements and floodplain easements can be used along stream corridors to take flood Land protected by Pheasants Forever prone land out of production.
2 6. Implement SMART Planning Practices SECTION FIVE G
pastured rural land, yet the portion of land the communities control is significant because urban areas with mostly impermeable surfaces have the highest runoff possible. This means that nearly all of the precipitation that falls on these areas becomes runoff and very little is infiltrated into the ground. Since the time many of these communities were formed over a century ago, precipitation has been treated as a nuisance. The majority infrastructure in the TRW is designed to transport runoff to locations outside of city limits as quickly as possible. Curb and gutter systems were installed in portions of many communities but the majority of stormwater runoff was simply straight piped into the nearest ditch or stream. Smaller communities that have been unable to develop stormwater enting storm water b infrastructure have areas that are routinely est Untion, are already implem est management practices TRW communites, like W inundated with stormwater causing problems for residents. Many communities have 5.E Objective 6: Work with Turkey River Waste agricultural land draining into or through Watershed Communities to implement SMART 1. SMART planning practices. TRW plan residential and business districts. Whether Planning practices to address stormwater. goal: 10% reduction in impermeable surface a community has existing stormwater Practices: Pond, Wetland, Rain Garden, Bio- or 10% increase in runoff captured from infrastructure or none at all, nearly every swale, Permeable Pavers, Green Roof, Native impermeable surfaces. The 23 communities community in the TRW is facing the need of Plantings, Tree and Shrub Plantings, Rain represented on the TRWMA Board control a replacement or installation of stormwater Barrels, Seperation of Runoff and Municipal lesser portion of the TRW than cropped or infrastructure.
65 66
Bio-swale Rain Garden Wetland
Stormwater infrastructure is aging and in affect businesses, are effective at removing or purchase rain barrels. A collaborative effort need of replacement or major repair in stormwater runoff efficiently, and can be would help TRW Communities share the costs of the majority of TRW communities. During more aesthetically pleasing than traditional experts to teach a rain barrel construction class, TRWMA Community Committee meetings, methods. materials, purchase of pre-fabricated barrels, or representatives discussed a number of to apply for a grant. Communities also discussed practices that can be used to harvest or The goal of the TRWMA is implement purchasing and sharing specialized equipment infiltrate stormwater runoff when replacing stormwater best management practices in every for maintaining or constructing stormwater the existing aging infrastructure. Figure 6.G.1 TRWMA community. However, to implement the management practices. shows the project ideas the TRW communities practices listed in Figure 6.G.1, financial and developed and which practice each is interested technical assistance is needed. In some cases, These projects were discussed for collaboration in implementing. Existing projects completed the TRW Community Committee discussed 1. Rain Barrels (Purchase or classes) by West Union, Calmar, Monona, and Elgin as collaborating on projects to reduce the financial 2. School Property Stormwater Reduction Program well as examples outside the watershed have burden. For example, nearly every community 3. Rain Garden/Bio-swale Professional demonstrated that stormwater runoff best on the TWRMA is interested in incorporating a 4. Permeable Pavement Maintenance Equipment Sharing management practices are practical, don’t rain barrel program for their residents to build 5. Business Incentive Program
2 SECTION FIVE G
In addition to collaborative efforts, TRWMA communities were also interested in implementing projects independently or in partnership with other public and private organizations such as SWCDs.
Proposed SMART planning practices and community projects include the following:
Elkader: rain-gardens, bio-swales, permeable pavers, native tallgrass prairie, rain-scaped park, and bank stabilization Monona: rain gardens, bio-swales, permeable pavers, native tallgrass prairie, and rain-scaped park Postville: wetland, permeable pavers, rain gardens, and bio-swales Volga: rain gardens, bio-swales, permeable pavers, native plantings, and wetlands
These and other TRW communities should work with the TRW Urban Conservationist, SWCDs, Engineers, and TRWMA Coordinator to plan, design, and implement projects. These professionals will help communities seek grant opportunities and programs to reduce the financial burden of infrastructure replacement and construction. As new SMART planning practices become available, they should be incorporated into this plan as well are planning to install permeable pavers Several TRW communties as community stormwater infrastructure plans.
67 68
COMMUNITY PROJECT IDEAS
j.
Pond, Wetland, orR ain Garden/Empty Permeable PaversRain-scaped Park School Storm Water Native Turf Project/ Lawn Nutrient ReDowntown- Business Rain-scapeBank Stabilization/Tree Planting Rain Barrel Program Green Roof Project Bio-swale Project Policy/Ordinance Small Lake Lot Project Strips of P. P. Revitalization Runoff Program Native Grasses duction/Grass MngmtRain-scape Incentive/ Blvd ProStream Meander (edible/other) Arlington X X X X X X X Calmar X X X X X X X X X X X X Clermont X X X X X X X X X X Cresco X X X X Elgin Elkader X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Farmersburg Fayette X X X X X X X X X X X X X Fort Atkinson X X X X X Garnavillo X X Hawkeye X X X Lawler X X X Maynard X X Monona X X X X X X X X X X Postville X X X X X X Strawberry X X X Point St Lucas X Volga X X X X X X X Wadena X X X X X Waucoma X X X X X X West Union X X X X X X X X X X X X
eloped ideas for implementing stormwater runoff best management practices Figure 6.G.1 Communities dev
2 7. Education & Outreach SECTION FIVE H
and considered new ideas before making final recommendations to the TRWMA Board. The TRWMA Board also considered the results of a Turkey River Watershed Landowner Survey and other implementation factors when developing this plan. The TRWMA Board feels that the following principles are important in all education and outreach efforts.
i. Respectful dialog should be used in all education and outreach efforts, as research confirms that the majority of the watershed residents care about the flooding and/or water quality issues. ii. Engagement should include both rural and urban landowners, as the issues are the responsibility of and impact all watershed residents. iii. Education and outreach will be most effective if rural and urban residents have been engaged in all aspects of engagement are critical for successful implementation the watershed project including research and planning, Education, outreach, and education and outreach, practice implementation, and policy development. 5.H Objective 7: Use existing and new members, biologists, county conservation personnel, iv. Individual and collective action should be proposed and education and outreach methods to engage SWCD Commissioners and staff, elected officials, undertaken voluntarily. producers and community members in all and local educators. This diverse team worked to v. Collective action should be encouraged but watershed aspects of flood protection. This plan was consider, combine, and recommend education and residents and groups represented within the watershed developed with input from the TRWMA Education outreach ideas that had been developed by all the will be more effective if they develop and implement ideas Committee, included persons of various backgrounds TRWMA committees, Board members, and partners. that they themselves want to see implemented rather than , such as farmers/producers, landowners, community The TRWMA Education Committee also proposed dictating action to other residents and groups.
69 70
Priority HUC 12 Watershed Map
2 SECTION FIVE H
vi. Dialog and discussion must recognize that not reaching out to stakeholders in every county receptive landowners to educate and help all watershed residents will agree on all issues or as well as providing technical assistance to them understand cost share opportunities so recommended actions and therefore encourage those urban and rural landowners that want they are more likely to participate. Regional diverse opportunities for engagement, planning, and to implement practices that reduce flooding. TRW Civil Engineers will design the structures. action. The TRWMA further recommends that these The County Engineers and Flood Mitigation vii. Education and outreach can inform policy change, professionals meet regularly to encourage Technicians will work to see the projects which can be used to maximize local resources and each other and share progress and information through to completion. effect change throughout the watershed, but should with each other. Some specific outreach and be supported by the majority of the constituents education that these personnel will utilize will 3. Rural and Urban Engagement. Landowners impacted by the policy. include the following. will be recruited from throughout the TRW to participate in various aspects of project Practices: Flood Reduction Technical Assistance 2. County Engineers Partnership. Given that research and promotion. Landowners will Outreach and Education in every TRW County, County there are 1,638 points at which roads meet be engaged through the www.turkeyriver. Engineers Partnership to Engage Landowners, TRW with drainages in the TRW and the TRW org website, recruited to host rain gauge/soil Producer Engagement in Research and Promotion County Boards of Supervisors have adopted moisture probes, be recruited to conduct tile- of Flood Reduction, Regional Outreach to Qualified policy to consider replacement of upland road line monitoring, and to appear in conservation Landowners in Strategic Landscape Positions, culverts with on-road water control structures promotional materials. Brochures, posters, Community Outreach and Engagement. whenever landowners will voluntarily partner. billboards, signs, press releases and radio spots The TRWMA Board recommends that the will be developed and distributed to promote 1. Watershed-wide Outreach. The TRWMA calls County Engineers work with two Regional implementation strategies in the TRW. for a minimum of five full-time Flood Mitigation Civil Engineer Technicians to engineer on- Technicians that are systematically reaching road water control structures and Flood 4. Targeted Landowner Outreach. Outreach out to, educating and engaging, and providing Mitigation Technicians to educate and engage efforts will be targeted to specific landowners technical assistance to Turkey River Watershed willing landowners. The County Engineers will that are in key landscape positions as identified landowners and other watershed stakeholders provide lists and prioritization of potential through analysis. These may include but including agricultural organizations, custom sites for on-road water control structures. are not limited to landowners in targeted sprayers, youth/schools, community partners, The Flood Mitigation Technicians will work subwatersheds, landowners eligible for and the press. These professionals should be with the County Engineers to reach out to specific state or federal programs, landowners
71 72
at locations for on-road retention structures, landowners within community drainages, and landowners within riparian zones and floodplains. All landowner projects will be completely voluntary.
Priority subwatersheds have been identified in each TRW county. These subwatersheds were selected based on criteria provided to the TRWMA SWCDs by the TRWMA as advised by the Iowa Flood Center for reduced flooding and improved water quality. Priority TRWMA subwatersheds include the following: i. Volga River Watershed Fayette County ii. Little Turkey River Watershed Howard/ Chickasaw Counties iii. Brownfield Creek Watershed Delaware Clayton Counties iv. Brockamp Watershed Winneshiek and Fayette Counties v. North Branch Turkey River Watershed Howard County vi. Beaver Creek Watershed Clayton and Fayette Counties
uccessfully engage landowners in conservation NRCS and SWCD staff s
2 8. Implement Policy SECTION FIVE I
road water control structures where possible when replacing a small bridge or culvert. The policy is shown in Appendix 7. This policy will help counties retain runoff where topography allows and landowners are willing to participate. Additionally, the policy will be recognized by FEMA in the event disaster relief funds are necessary to repair infrastructure. FEMA will recognize existing local policies when replacing infrastructure that has been damaged or destroyed and are more likely to pay for infrastructure that will help prevent future disasters then replace it with the same infrastructure that failed.
The TRWMA has reviewed several examples of policy from other areas outside of the TRW that can be adapted for use within the watershed. Communities and counties can incorporate policy that allows them to function in a manner that maximizes the economic licy to use on-road control structures where possible and aesthetic benefits of SMART planning. Policies and TRW counties passed po ordinances should be implemented so as not to deter economic growth and sustainability but still achieve the 5.I Objective 8: Work with TRWMA members Policies or ordinances can be an important tool for desired goal of stormwater management. The TRWMA and partners to develop and implement communities, counties and other entities to ensure Coordinator will work with TRWMA members and policy that supports a hydrologically resilient residents and developers are moving toward a goal TRWMA Committees, watershed personnel, community TRW: i.e. policies that help the watershed that is for the benefit of all involved. Very few entities development professionals, and attorneys to adapt new have less stormwater runoff and lower peak in the TRW currently have ordinances that serve to or existing policies from other areas to fit their local flows during heavy rainfall events and a reduce runoff. Six of the TRW County Boards of needs. This effort will also provide opportunities for landscape that is more resistant to drought. Supervisors passed a policy in 2014 to consider on- shared learning and shared policy development.
73 74
9. Document Results SECTION FIVE J
timely and direct manner to improve the measurable impact of their work. They would also like to quantify the cost effectiveness of implementing this plan. The tools, frequency of use of those tools, and related cost for each type of monitoring and evaluation that the TRWMA proposes to use are detailed further below.
1. Land Cover. The 2013 land cover for the TRW is currently being assessed by Northeast Iowa RC&D using a new GIS tool, Rapid Land Cover Mapper (RLCM). through funding provided by USDA/NRCS Conservation Innovation Grant. The RLCM tool is an ESRI ArcGIS based tool that utilizes dot grids and high resolution aerial imagery to assign land cover to specific geographic regions. This tool was developed by the USGS at the Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center and has been used for similar land cover assessments in West Africa and Stream Level Gauge in the TRW the Black Hills of South Dakota. This new tool more accurately and efficiently maps land cover for select geographical areas than existing land cover datasets 5.J Objective 9: Quantitatively document of this plan has on the TRW. They want to quantify the such as the National Land Cover Data or National the hydrological, water quality, social, and reduction in flow, improvements in water quality, and Agricultural Statistics Service satellite methods. For policy impacts and changes that result from changes in policy, attitudes, and engagement. They example, ten-meter resolution land cover data will be the implementation of this plan. The TRWMA would like to periodically review and understand the available the same year as the imagery is released for Board would like to document for themselves, their impact and effectiveness of specific objectives and a geographic region rather than years later. The RLCM members, watershed residents, other Iowa WMAs, and methods so that they can make adjustments and Tool will be used to quickly analyze and chronicle the Iowa Legislature the impact that implementation modifications to those objectives and methods in a short-term or annual changes in practice adoption, land
2 SECTION FIVE I
cover and conservation trends. This tool will help 35+ tributaries. Samples are collected during a 7-9 hour Iowa RC&D, the McKnight Foundation, Iowa Farm the TRWMA track and better understand the net span and sent to the State Hygienic Lab for analysis. Bureau (through County Farm Bureau offices) change in land cover as it occurs across the TRW. The lab analyzes the samples for concentrations of the Iowa Flood Center/IIHR and 30 landowners Ammonia Nitrogen as N, E. Coli Bacteria, Nitrate + in the TRW have agreed to host rain gauge and 2. Surface Flow. There are currently twenty-one Nitrite Nitrogen as N, and Total Phosphate as P, while soil moisture/temperature probes in the TRW. stream/river gauging stations located in the TRW. field measurements include water temperature, Many of these units are on farms; some are in These gauges were put in place by the IFC and USGS. pH, Dissolved Oxygen, Transparency, and Chloride. or near communities. These stations will transmit In response to the 2008 floods, the IFC developed Results are posted on the www.turkeyriver.org data in real time transmit data automatically and and maintains a statewide network of stream stage website. Six of the afore mentioned stream gauge be available in near real time on the IFIS website. sensors designed to measure stream height and sites also have real-time nitrate monitors in place that The information available from these units, when transmit data automatically and frequently to the is automatically and frequently transmitted to IFC. This coupled with real-time, in-stream nitrate monitors Iowa Flood Information System (IFIS), where the data is used by landowners, citizens, communities, and and gauging stations (which are already placed public and TRWMA partners can view both IFC resource professionals to better understand nutrient throughout the watershed) will help producers and USGS gauges in the TRW in real-time. Existing loss in the watershed, find cost-effective ways to understand why they should adopt nutrient gauges should be maintained and additional gauges solve water-related problems, and make financial and management and flood reduction practices. added as projects across the TRW are implemented technical assistance available to public and private This strategy will also engage landowners in to help the TRWMA, their partners and all the TRW landowners when needed. As related to this plan, research and monitoring, creating a greater residents understand and document the changes this monitoring makes it possible for the TRWMA to sense of project ownership. This monitoring is in flow that result from the implementation of document water quality improvements that correlate also watched by TRWMA Board members, TRW practices within specific portions of the TRW. to implementation of this plan. These sites do not communities, counties and SWCDs as well as directly correlate water quality data to any single Emergency Managers, County Engineers and 3. Water Quality. Northeast Iowa RC&D and members producer but provide baseline information for large others interested in how rainfall and soil moisture of the TRWMA Technical Committee have been subwatersheds of the TRW that are tens of thousands influence stormwater runoff. Because these units working together to monitor water quality at 50 in of acres in size. Continuation of this monitoring will will be placed in strategic locations throughout the TRW for three years. Beginning in May of 2011, allow the TRWMA partners to better understand and the watershed, they will also allow the TRWMA to monthly water samples were collected from April document the water quality implications of flood document changes in hydrology and stormwater through November from several locations along the prevention practices. runoff in relation to rainfall and soil moisture. main branch of the Turkey River, and at locations along 4. Precipitation and Soil Conditions. Northeast Funding has already been secured for the units but
75 76
Gauging Stations Map
2 SECTION FIVE J
data transmission, Internet costs and repair must be extensive, well-developed karst system of the TRW. database can be used to analyze the impact of paid for over the 20-year implementation period. This analysis should be repeated for other springs the implementation of this plan when overlayed of significance to ensure that the TRWMA is with other data collected through other methods 5. Social Measures. The TRWMA has completed addressing all the land area that is contributing to including, but not limited to, flow analysis, which one survey of 1,500 TRW residents including the hydrology of the TRW. Analysis should include will allow the TRWMA to adjust objectives and 1,000 producers and 500 community members dye tracing, mapping of underlying bedrock, methods as needed to maximize the impact of in the watersheds. This random survey provided and other technologies to determine drainages the project. Documentation of dollars expended baseline information regarding social perceptions, for larger springs. The purpose of this study is by location will also help the TRWMA complete attitudes, and awareness in the watershed. The to determine the subsurface watershed that is cost benefit analysis of practices within specific TRWMA will repeat this survey at least every five contributing runoff to the TRW which may differ subwatersheds, targeted landscape positions and/ years. There are over 3,400 farms in the TRW. considerably from the superficial drainage area. or the entire TRW. This direct mailing will include TRWMA updates either in the form of a letter or a newsletter and 7. Implementation Tracking. The technical The TRWMA will work with the technical may include other outreach materials developed personnel involved with implementation of personnel to develop measures for practices through this project including, but not limited to, this plan will be in a unique position to record for which there is no current information such the brochures develop through the project. The implementation of project practices, including as watershed wide soil health improvements. www.turkeyriver.org website will also be used the number of practices applied, the GPS The NRCS State Soil Scientist recommended to track social changes including interest in the locations of said practices, structure size that the Haney Soil Test be used to determine TRW over time. The website analytics will provide specifications, number of acres treated, length a soil health score when the TRWMA technical specific information about the number of visits of stream treated, calculations on changes in personnel are working with landowners that per page, etc. that will help the TRWMA better rainfall runoff associated with specific practices, are willing to work to improve their soil health understand the effectiveness of various outreach and other details that should help the TRWMA (including producers willing to install cover campaigns and components of this plan. quantify the impact of the practices installed crops and/or no-till practices.) This test can help through the implementation of this plan. The producers understand if they can improve their 6. Springsheds. The Big Spring Study provided technical personnel should not only document soil health and what if any measures should be important information about the Big Spring and report this information to the TRWMA taken. Organic carbon and nitrogen ratios can springshed or capture zone that details the flow Board but they should also keep a collective be used to determine which cover crops the path of surface water as it is pushed through the GIS and descriptive database of practices. The producer could plant to improve soil health as
77 78
measured by this index. The soil health score allows the producer to determine if soil health is improving.
8. Policy Tracking. The public and private policy information that is gathered by TRWMA technical personnel should be documented and entered into a GIS database of policies adopted by type and location in the watershed, as well as the resulting impact of those policy changes as they related to implementation of practices and/or influence on specific subwatersheds, targeted landscape positions, downstream infrastructure, etc.
9. Economic Impact. The damage associated with flooding further reduces the lifespan of aging public roads and bridges and if unchecked may result in a decreased life span for culverts, roads and bridges. The University of Iowa, in partnership with Northeast Iowa RC&D, has expressed interest in analyzing the economic impact of these issues and policies. The TRWMA supports this work. The economic impact of flooding and the related county policy on public infrastructure, particularly culverts, roads and bridges is important to the TRWMA as it will be useful in understanding and evaluating future public investment in on-road Infrastructure Damage in the TRW structures and other partnerships.
2 SECTION FIVE J
Rain Gauge Map
79 80
Dollars should be Documented - Flood Damage in Fayette County Reductions in FEMA Recovery
2 Section Six Turkey River Watershed Budget
81 82
Budget SECTION SIX A
Budget for Objectives 1-3
2 SECTION SIX A
Budget for Objectives 4-7
83 84
*Total plan cost calculated with one year of cost for Objective 1 Total Plan Cost
2 Flood Reduction Plan A 20 Year Strategic Plan to Increase the Hydrologic Function & Resiliency of the Turkey River Watershed Developed for the TRWMA by Northeast Iowa RC&D Inc. with funding provided by HUD/CDBG
May 2015
85